Confused about Poynting Theorem and Retarded field.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the application of Poynting's theorem and the concept of retarded fields in electromagnetic theory, specifically referencing Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics." Participants express confusion regarding the calculation of energy flow into a defined box using different methods: one using the surface integral of the Poynting vector and the other using stored energy in the electromagnetic field. The book's approach, which focuses on potential energy rather than the expected surface integral, raises questions about its validity in the context of retarded fields. Additionally, there is a mention of using the wave equation for the vector potential to derive current density, leading to further discussions about the implications of zero current density on energy calculations. The conversation highlights the complexities and nuances involved in applying these electromagnetic principles correctly.
yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
294
This is not homework even thought this is an example in the book of Griffiths "Introduction of Electrodynamics" 3rd edition. This is a mix retarded field and Poynting theorem question:

\vec E \cdot \vec J \;=\;-\frac 1 2 \frac {\partial}{\partial t} ( \epislon_0 E^2 +\frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) \;-\;\frac 1 {\mu_0} \nabla \cdot (\vec E X \vec B) (8.8)

\frac {dW}{dt} \;=\; \int _{v'} (\vec E \cdot \vec J) d \vec {v'} \;=\; -\frac 1 2 \frac {\partial}{\partial t} \int _{v'} ( \epsilon_0 E^2 +\frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) d \vec {v'}\;-\;\frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s'} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s'} (8.9)




In this example, the book given:
V=0,\;\;\hbox{ and } \;\;\vec A=\frac{\mu_0 k}{4c}(ct-|x|)^2 \hat z \;\hbox { for x = +ve and }\;\; \vec A=0 \;\;\hbox { for x = -ve.}

c=\frac 1 {\sqrt{\mu_0 \epsilon_0}}

From this, you get:

\vec E= -\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t} \;=\; -\frac {\mu_0 k}{2} (ct-|x|)\hat z \;\;\;\hbox { and }\;\;\; \vec B = \nabla X \vec A = ^+_- \hat y \frac{\mu_0 k}{2c}(ct-|x|)



Then the book want to determine the energy per unit time flowing into a box between t1 and t2 with given:

1) Dimensions of the box are 0<y<w, 0<z<l and d<x<(d+h) where w,l, d and h are all +ve number.

2) t1= d/c and t2 =(d+h)/c where c=\frac 1 {\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}.

Since x is +ve and t1= d/c and t2 =(d+h)/c therefore:

\vec E= -\frac {\mu_0 k}{2} (d+h-x)\hat z \;\;\;\hbox { and }\;\;\; \vec B = \hat y \frac{\mu_0 k}{2c}(d+h-x)



Since the question is energy flow into the box, I use second integration term of (8.9)
W \;=\; [\frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s&#039;} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s&#039;}]




But the book do this instead:

W\;=\; \frac 1 2 \int _{v&#039;} ( \epsilon_0 E^2 + \frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) d v&#039;


My understanding is \frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s&#039;} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s&#039;} is the EM power flowing through the surface s&#039;. Why is the book use the stored energy or the energy to assemble the charge and current to do the calculation? This is retarded field problem where the EM field just reach the box at t1 and nothing exit the box at t2.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone please?

I did more reading, even the examples from the book use the surface integral of the Poynting Vector to find the energy per unit time cross the surface. But here the book use the potential energy of the EM field which I cannot agree.
 
what is ve?
 
kcdodd said:
what is ve?

+ve and -ve is just lazy way to say possitive and negative resp.
 
Do you mean that x = +ve means x > 0?

What I was going to say is that you can use the wave equation for the vector potential to find the current density.

\nabla^2\vec{A} - \frac{1}{c^2}\partial^2_t\vec{A} = -\mu_0\vec{J}

And it looks to me like like J = 0, which would mean J*E = 0 too, which means the two integrals must be equal in magnitude. However the setup is still a bit confusing to me, there is funny business at x=0.
 
Thread ''splain this hydrostatic paradox in tiny words'
This is (ostensibly) not a trick shot or video*. The scale was balanced before any blue water was added. 550mL of blue water was added to the left side. only 60mL of water needed to be added to the right side to re-balance the scale. Apparently, the scale will balance when the height of the two columns is equal. The left side of the scale only feels the weight of the column above the lower "tail" of the funnel (i.e. 60mL). So where does the weight of the remaining (550-60=) 490mL go...
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. I am in no way trolling. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. Yes, I'm questioning the most elementary physics question we're given in this world. The classic elevator in motion question: A person is standing on a scale in an elevator that is in constant motion...
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...
Back
Top