Working with Electric Field E, not Vector Potential A

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the use of the electric field E in relation to vector potential A within the context of Maxwell's Equations. Participants clarify that E and B are typically defined through Maxwell's Equations, which can also be expressed in terms of potentials. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationship between electric and magnetic fields and their respective potentials. There is a request for specificity regarding the initial inquiry about working with E instead of A. Ultimately, the focus remains on the standard formulation of Maxwell's Equations in terms of E and B.
WeiJie
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
We commonly have E and B defined as:
e99910141286a0c46ef245c0ffb0a07d0a830817

06e479269ae003ed92c057eecdcf35f2b060cf70


But how can I work in electric field E, instead of vector potential A?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am sorry, but it is unclear what you are asking. Can you be more specific?
 
WeiJie said:
We commonly have E and B defined as:
e99910141286a0c46ef245c0ffb0a07d0a830817

06e479269ae003ed92c057eecdcf35f2b060cf70


But how can I work in electric field E, instead of vector potential A?

That's not Maxwell's Equations. That is the relationship between the potentials and ##\mathbf E## and ##\mathbf B##.

Maxwell's Equations are commonly written in terms of ##\mathbf E## and ##\mathbf B##:
$$\nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac \rho {\varepsilon_0} \\
\nabla \cdot \mathbf B = 0 \\
\nabla \times \mathbf E = - \frac {\partial \mathbf B} {\partial t} \\
\nabla \times \mathbf B = \mu_0 \mathbf J + \mu_0 \varepsilon_0 \frac {\partial \mathbf E} {\partial t}$$

Those can of course be rewritten in terms of the potentials by substitution. But the usual thing you find when you search for "Maxwell's Equations" is in terms of the fields.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top