Why Does the First Term in the Force Equation Between Current Loops Cancel Out?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter klawlor419
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Current Force Loops
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the force between two loops of current, specifically exploring why a term in the force equation cancels out. Participants are examining the application of the Biot-Savart law and the Lorentz force law to demonstrate that Newton's third law holds true for arbitrary current loops. The conversation includes mathematical reasoning and conceptual clarification.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the force equation derived from the Biot-Savart law and expresses confusion about why a specific term cancels out.
  • Another participant points out that the separation variable \( s \) cannot be factored out of the integrals and provides a specific integral that evaluates to zero when integrating over loop 1.
  • Some participants acknowledge the explanation and express understanding, while others request further clarification on the reasoning behind the integral being zero.
  • A later reply mentions an important identity and suggests that the divergence theorem can be used to show that the term for loop 1 vanishes.
  • One participant raises a scenario involving distant current loops and questions the applicability of the Biot-Savart law in that context, noting the absence of a time variable in the equations presented.
  • Another participant clarifies that the Biot-Savart law operates under a magnetostatic approximation, which may not hold in the far field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the cancellation of the term in the force equation. While some agree on the mathematical reasoning provided, others remain uncertain and seek further explanation. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the clarity of the integral's evaluation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding the assumptions made in the application of the Biot-Savart law and its validity in different contexts, such as the far field. The discussion also highlights the dependence on specific mathematical identities and the divergence theorem without resolving the intricacies involved.

klawlor419
Messages
117
Reaction score
0
I am working on a problem involving force between two loops of current. The problem is to prove the for any arbitrary loops of current, Newtons third law holds true.

I understand the basics of the approach but I am having trouble seeing why a term goes to zero. The basic setup is to use the Biot-Savart law to predict the field of a segment of the current loop then to use the Lorentz force law to predict the force acting on a segment of the second loop.

This has the form,
$$d\mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{\mu_0 I_1 I_2}{4\pi s^3}(d\mathbf{l_1}\times(d\mathbf{l_2}\times \mathbf{s}))$$

Which when simplified by the triple-product and integrated gives the following form,
$$ \mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{\mu_0 I_1 I_2}{4\pi s^2}(\oint\oint d\mathbf{l_2}(d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot \hat{s}) -\oint\oint\hat{s}(d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot d\mathbf{l_2}))$$

Its easy enough to see right from here that F12=-F21 just by the fact that you pick up a minus sign by switching the separation vector. So in that sense the problem is solved, at least from what I see right now.

However I was looking in the Griffiths EM and apparently the first term on the left cancels out somehow and I can't figure why. (Problem 5.49) Any suggestions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
a couple of things.

1. s can't be pulled out of the integrals.

2. look at this term:
$$ \mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{\mu_0 I_1 I_2}{4\pi}\oint\oint d\mathbf{l_2}\left(
d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot \frac{\hat{s}}{s^2}\right) $$
then realize that if we do the integral over loop 1 first, we have
$$ \oint d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot \frac{\hat{s}}{s^2} = \oint d_1\frac{1}{s} = 0. $$
where the subscript on 1 means I'm treating all the terms associated
with loop 1 as variables and freezing all terms associated with loop 2.

Just remember \nabla f \cdot d\mathbf{r} = df and you're integrating
over a loop that starts and end at the same place.
 
Ah nice, I see now. Thanks for the trick.
 
please could you explain why the integral over loop 1 is zero? I'm struggling to see your method.. :/
 
jsholliday7 said:
please could you explain why the integral over loop 1 is zero? I'm struggling to see your method.. :/


there's an important identity involving one of the terms. Once you use that identity, you can deduce by divergence theorem that the entire term for loop 1 vanishes.
 
klawlor419 said:
I am working on a problem involving force between two loops of current. The problem is to prove the for any arbitrary loops of current, Newtons third law holds true.

I understand the basics of the approach but I am having trouble seeing why a term goes to zero. The basic setup is to use the Biot-Savart law to predict the field of a segment of the current loop then to use the Lorentz force law to predict the force acting on a segment of the second loop.

This has the form,
$$d\mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{\mu_0 I_1 I_2}{4\pi s^3}(d\mathbf{l_1}\times(d\mathbf{l_2}\times \mathbf{s}))$$

Which when simplified by the triple-product and integrated gives the following form,
$$ \mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{\mu_0 I_1 I_2}{4\pi s^2}(\oint\oint d\mathbf{l_2}(d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot \hat{s}) -\oint\oint\hat{s}(d\mathbf{l_1}\cdot d\mathbf{l_2}))$$

Its easy enough to see right from here that F12=-F21 just by the fact that you pick up a minus sign by switching the separation vector. So in that sense the problem is solved, at least from what I see right now.

However I was looking in the Griffiths EM and apparently the first term on the left cancels out somehow and I can't figure why. (Problem 5.49) Any suggestions?
So if there is a loop current in a start say 10 light years away and I switch on a loop current in the Earth now the Newtons third law holds true.

Please, prove it with integrals and divergence theorem.

By the way I did not see any t (time) variable in your formulae.
 
Alva, the Biot Savart law uses the magnetostatic approximation. It doesn't apply in the far field and there is no time. This is a standard approximation, but it is an approximation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
814
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
744
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K