I Why Does the Negative Sign Appear in the Vector Potential Equation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the derivation of the vector potential and the confusion regarding the signs and variables involved in the equations. A key point of contention is the transition from the gradient with respect to the y-variable to the x-variable, particularly concerning the equality of various expressions. The participants highlight the need for clarity on how the gradient operator behaves when applied to different variables and under integrals. The vector identity is referenced to clarify the relationship between the terms, suggesting that proper application of the identity could resolve the confusion. Overall, the conversation seeks to clarify the mathematical steps involved in the derivation process.
deuteron
Messages
64
Reaction score
14
TL;DR Summary
.
We have motivated the derivation of the vector potential in the following way:
1706619806217.png

However, I cannot understand where the ##-## sign in the second equality came from. I thought that it was because the gradient was with respect to the ##y##-variable, and then using the product rule one could explain the transition to the last expression, but in that case ##\nabla_{\vec y}\times\vec j(\vec y)## would have to be zero, which I am not really sure is necessarily true; and in that case I would again not understand how a ##\nabla_{\vec y}## would become a ##\nabla_{\vec x}##, since at ##\nabla\times \vec A(\vec x)## I assume ##\nabla## must be acting on the ##\vec x##
That's why I don't see how the left and right hand sides of the third, fourth, and possibly the fifts ##=## signs are equal to each other, can someone please help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You know that
##\nabla_x \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}=-\dfrac{x-y}{|x-y|^3}=-\nabla_y \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}##
It follows that
##\dfrac{x-y}{|x-y|^3}=+\nabla_y \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}=-\nabla_x \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}.##

So the second equality is $$=-\frac{1}{c}\int \int \int j(y)\times\nabla_x \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}d^3y$$Does this help?
 
but in that case how do we take ##\nabla_{\vec x}## out of the integral? It wasn't cross multiplied with ##\frac 1 {|\vec x-\vec y|}##, but now it is?
 
The vector identity says
##\vec{\nabla}\times(\psi~\vec A)= \psi \vec{\nabla}\times\vec A+\vec{\nabla}\psi\times \vec A. ##
Here you identify
##\vec{\nabla}\rightarrow \vec{\nabla}_x##
##\psi \rightarrow \dfrac{1}{|x-y|}##
##\vec A \rightarrow \vec j (y)##

What do you get when you put these in the identity?
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Back
Top