Why does (current density) dJ/dt=0?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the time derivative of current density, specifically the equation $$\mu_0\frac{∂\vec{J}}{∂t}=0$$, in the context of deriving Maxwell's wave equation for the electric field. Participants clarify that electromagnetic waves are generated by the term $$\frac{∂D}{∂t}$$ rather than the current density $$\vec{J}$$. The confusion arises from the assumption that a constant current density would not produce a wave, while the time-varying current density $$\frac{∂\vec{J}}{∂t}$$ is essential for wave propagation. The discussion emphasizes the role of the corrected Ampere's law in this derivation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Maxwell's equations, particularly the corrected Ampere's law.
  • Familiarity with electromagnetic wave theory.
  • Knowledge of vector calculus, especially curl operations.
  • Basic concepts of electric displacement field (D) and magnetic field (B).
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Maxwell's wave equation for the electric field.
  • Learn about the implications of the corrected Ampere's law in electromagnetic theory.
  • Explore the relationship between current density and electromagnetic wave propagation.
  • Investigate the role of the electric displacement field (D) in wave generation.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, electrical engineers, and researchers in electromagnetic theory who seek to deepen their understanding of wave propagation and Maxwell's equations.

iScience
Messages
466
Reaction score
5
could someone explain to me why the the time derivative of current density J would be zero?

more specifically..

$$\mu_0\frac{∂\vec{J}}{∂t}=0$$


trying to derive maxwell's wave equation for E-field and i guess one of the assumptions i have to make is the above. but if I'm making a wave, i thought i had to have accelerating charges in which case why would the above be true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
iScience said:
could someone explain to me why the the time derivative of current density J would be zero?

more specifically..

$$\mu_0\frac{∂\vec{J}}{∂t}=0$$


trying to derive maxwell's wave equation for E-field and i guess one of the assumptions i have to make is the above. but if I'm making a wave, i thought i had to have accelerating charges in which case why would the above be true?

The Maxwell equation you are referring to is ∇ x H = j + ∂D/∂t

where

H = B0
j = current density vector
D0E.

Fact: e-m waves are created by virtue of the ∂D/∂t term, not the j term.

BTW I am not aware that ∂j/∂t has to be zero.
 
yea that's the equation I'm referring to (the corrected ampere's law).I agree that a constant J would not produce a wave, however ∂J/∂t should. and here's where i get ∂J/∂t:if we set this equation equal to faraday's law in differential form:

$$\frac{∂}{∂t}(\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{B})= \frac{∂}{∂t}(\mu_0(\vec{J}+\epsilon_0\frac{∂\vec{E}}{∂t}))$$

$$\nabla \times \frac{∂\vec{B}}{∂t}=-\vec{\nabla} \times (\vec{\nabla} \times E)$$$$\frac{∂}{∂t}(\mu_0(\vec{J}+\epsilon_0\frac{∂\vec{E}}{∂t}))=-\vec{\nabla} \times (\vec{\nabla} \times E)$$

this is the place I'm referring to. why does the \mu_0 \frac{∂\vec{J}}{∂t} term disappear?
 
\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{B}= \mu_0\left(\vec{J}+\epsilon_0\frac{∂\vec{E}}{∂t}\right)

and

\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{E}= -\frac{∂\vec{B}}{∂t}

Take the curl of the second one,

\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{E}= -\frac{∂}{∂t}\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{B}

and substitute the first one
--->

\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{E}= -\frac{∂}{∂t}\mu_0\left(\vec{J}+\epsilon_0\frac{∂\vec{E}}{∂t}\right)

ehild
 
exactly what i did..

still don't see how that term disappears
 
What do you mean that J disappears? It is still there.

ehild
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K