When does the vector potential A affect the E field?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conditions under which the vector potential A influences the electric field E in electromagnetism, specifically through the equation ∇E = -∇V - ∂A/∂t. The second term is non-zero when the vector potential A is time-dependent, which occurs when the magnetic field B is also time-dependent, necessitating changing charge distributions or currents. The conversation references Jefimenko's equations and emphasizes that the time derivative of B vanishes only if the current density j and the time derivative of E are zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus in electromagnetism
  • Familiarity with Maxwell's equations
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic wave propagation
  • Concept of charge distributions and current densities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Jefimenko's equations for a deeper understanding of potentials and fields
  • Learn about electromagnetic wave solutions in the radiation gauge
  • Explore the implications of time-dependent magnetic fields on electric fields
  • Investigate the mathematical framework of vector potentials in non-simply connected spaces
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism who seek to understand the relationship between vector potentials and electric fields in dynamic systems.

DoobleD
Messages
259
Reaction score
20
This is probably fairly simple, but I have a hard time to grasp the concept of the vector potential A in electromgnetism. Especially, in the following equation for the electric field :

\vec{E} = - \nabla V - \frac{\partial \vec{A}}{\partial t}

When does the second term is not 0 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When the vector potential is time-dependent.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and NFuller
Orodruin said:
When the vector potential is time-dependent.

Aha, thanks, but that's obvious in the equation. I'm looking to what makes it time-dependent.

EDIT : Well actually, I suppose this is when B is time-dependent ?
 
You need charge distributions or currents that change over time. Otherwise everything can be treated as static.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DoobleD
DoobleD said:
Aha, thanks, but that's obvious in the equation. I'm looking to what makes it time-dependent.

EDIT : Well actually, I suppose this is when B is time-dependent ?
See Jefimenko's equations.
 
As the most simple example take the free plane-wave modes of the electromagnetic field. In the radiation gauge, i.e., with the potentials fulfilling
$$A^0=V=0, \quad \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}=0,$$
You have
$$\vec{A}(t,\vec{x})=\vec{A}_0 \exp(-\mathrm{i} \omega t+\mathrm{i} \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}),$$
where ##\vec{A}_0 \cdot \vec{k}=0## and ##\omega=c |\vec{k}|##. Then
$$\vec{E}=-\frac{1}{c} \partial_t \vec{A}=\mathrm{i} \omega/c \vec{A}_0 \exp(\cdots), \quad \vec{B}=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A} = \mathrm{i} \vec{k} \times \vec{A}_0 \exp(\cdots).$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DoobleD and Orodruin
If the underlying space is simply connected, the time derivative of the vector potential vanishes if the time derivative of the magnetic field vanishes:

##\mathrm{d}_\mathrm{s}B = 0 \Rightarrow B = \mathrm{d}_\mathrm{s} A##, where the subscript s stands for "spatial". Or in other notation ##\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A} = \vec{B}##. You can pull the time derivative into ##\mathrm{d}_\mathrm{s}##.

The time derivative of ##\vec{B}## vanishes if and only if ##\vec{j} + \frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t} = 0## (in natural units with ##c=1##).

If the underlying space is not simply connected, there does not a priori exist a vector potential, and hence the right side of your equation does not necessarily exist.
 
Thanks for the answers and insights ! It does help.
 
Metmann said:
The time derivative of ##\vec{B}## vanishes if and only if ##\vec{j} + \frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t} = 0## (in natural units with ##c=1##).

That's wrong. According to Maxwell's equations, the time derivative of B vanishes if and only if
$$
\nabla \times \mathbf{E} = \mathbf{0}.
$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Metmann, DoobleD and vanhees71
  • #10
Jano L. said:
That's wrong

Sure, I would edit it, but somehow this isn't possible any longer. But thanks for correcting it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
408
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
728
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K