Why Does the Toroid's Magnetic Field Equation Use a Cubed Distance Term?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the magnetic field equation for a toroid, specifically the use of a cubed distance term in the equation derived from the Biot-Savart law. The original equation presented by Griffiths includes a term that participants believe may be a mistake, suggesting it should involve the vector r instead of r hat, which would affect the denominator. Participants express concerns about the dimensional consistency of the equation as it stands. The consensus leans towards the idea that the cubed term is incorrect, and clarification is sought on this point. The discussion highlights the importance of accurate mathematical representation in physics equations.
richyw
Messages
179
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm working through a proof that says the magnetic field of a toroid is circumferential at all points inside and outside the toroid. I can follow most of the proof, but am a bit confused where the first equation comes from.

Here is the figure from the textbook (Griffith's 4th Ed).

http://media.newschoolers.com/uploads/images/17/00/67/76/17/677617.jpeg

To begin the proof, Griffiths starts with the field at \mathbf{r} due to the current element at \mathbf{r}'.d\mathbf{B}=\frac{\mu_0}{4\pi}\frac{\mathbf{I}\times\mathbf{\hat{{u}}}}{u^3}dl'

Homework Equations



\mathbf{B}=\frac{\mu_0}{4 \pi}\int\frac{\mathbf{I}\times\mathbf{\hat{u}}}{u^2}dl'

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm just confused at how Griffiths got from the Biot-Savart law above, into the equation he posted in the question. (I replaced the script r with a u). Where does the cubed term come from?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe that is a mistake in the text. I think he meant it to be the vector r and not r hat, in which case the denominator would be cubed.
 
I agree with post #2. Otherwise the dimensions don't check out.
 
cool thanks. I was thinking that, but I wanted to confirm!
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top