Why is the curl of (E + dA/dt) equal to zero?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Poirot
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the equation ∇ x (E + dA/dt) = 0, derived from Faraday-Lenz's law and the relationship between magnetic and electric fields. It highlights that in electrostatics, the curl of the electric field is zero, allowing for a scalar potential representation. The presence of a non-zero magnetic field complicates this relationship, as it implies that the curl of the electric field is not necessarily zero. The conversation also references Helmholtz's theorem, which states that a curl-free field can be expressed as the gradient of a scalar potential. Understanding these concepts is crucial for grasping the behavior of electric fields in dynamic situations.
Poirot
Messages
87
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


This isn't necessarily a question but something I found in my notes that I didn't understand.
It says that from B = x A one can plug this into Faraday-Lenz's law x E = d(B)/dt and it leads to the equation:
x (E + d(A)/dt)=0.
From this is says "Using Helmholtz theorem, one can represent the curl free field as the gradient of a scalar potential."

Homework Equations


B = x A
x E = d(B)/dt
x (E + d(A)/dt)=0

The Attempt at a Solution


I know that in electrostatics the curl of the electric field is zero and hence there is a scalar potential associated such that E = - V but I don't see the jump for the case involving the vector potential.

Any guidance/explanation would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In electrostatics, there are no electric currents, i.e., ##\vec{B}=\vec{0}## so that ##\nabla \times \vec{E} = \vec{0}##.

However, in general, ##\vec{B}=\vec{B}(\vec{x},t)## so that ##\nabla \times \vec{E} \neq \vec{0}##

See if you can work out the consequence of having a non-zero magnetic field on the form of the electric field ##\vec{E}## in terms of the scalar potential ##V## and the vector potential ##\vec{A}##.

P.S.: This does not really strike me as being a homework problem, so it's probably better suited for the 'Classical Physics' subforum.
 
Poirot said:
x (E + d(A)/dt)=0.
The curl of a gradient is always zero ##\nabla \times \nabla \Phi = 0## (this is an identity) where ##\Phi## a scalar function.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
842
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
992