Faraday's law and gauss's law for magnetism apparent contradiction

AI Thread Summary
Gauss's law for magnetism states that the magnetic flux through a closed surface is zero, indicating the absence of magnetic monopoles. In contrast, Faraday's law involves the time derivative of the magnetic flux through an open surface, which can vary over time. The apparent contradiction arises from the different types of surfaces used in each law; closed surfaces have no boundary, while open surfaces do. The discussion clarifies that if the magnetic flux is zero at one moment, it remains zero at all times, aligning both laws consistently. Ultimately, the local form of Maxwell's equations reinforces the compatibility of Gauss's law and Faraday's law.
Physics news on Phys.org
In Gauss's Law, the integral is over a closed surface, e.g. a complete sphere, cylinder, etc.

In Faraday's Law, the integral is over an open surface whose edge is the path used in the line integral of E on the other side of the equation. For example, the surface might be a hemisphere, whose edge is a circular path. The integral of B would be over the hemisphere, and the integral of E would be around the circular path.
 
jtbell said:
In Gauss's Law, the integral is over a closed surface, e.g. a complete sphere, cylinder, etc.

In Faraday's Law, the integral is over an open surface whose edge is the path used in the line integral of E on the other side of the equation. For example, the surface might be a hemisphere, whose edge is a circular path. The integral of B would be over the hemisphere, and the integral of E would be around the circular path.

If I understand correctly, Gauss's law is for a surface off which someone walking could never fall. Like the Earth for example.

Whereas Faraday's Law is for surfaces like when we thought the Earth was flat.

Is that correct?
 
There is, of course no contradiction, because a closed surface has no boundary, and thus for a closed surface A, you have
\int_A \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \vec{B}=0.
On the other hand there is Faraday's Law that reads for any surface A'
\int_{A'} \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \partial_t \vec{B}=-\int_{\partial A'} \mathrm{d} \vec{x} \cdot \vec{E}.
You can take out the time derivative of the integral, but you have to take into account that there is a piece from the change of the area with time (if it's moving). In this form Faraday's Law reads
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} \int_{A'} \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \vec{B}=-\int_{\partial A'} \mathrm{d} \vec{x} \cdot (\vec{E}+\vec{v} \times \vec{B}),
where \vec{v}=\vec{v}(t,\vec{x}) is the velocity field of the area (including its boundary).

If A'=A is closed, you have \partial A'=0, and thus the right-hand side vanishes. This means that if the magnetic flux through a surface vanishes at some time t_0, it must vanish at any time. This means Gauß's Law for the magnetic field (which says that there are no magnetic charges) is consistent with the dynamics of the magnetic field.

Of course, all this is much more simply stated for the local form of Maxwell's equations. Faraday's Law reads
\partial_t \vec{B}=-\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{E}.
Taking the divergence of the whole equation leads to
\partial_t (\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B})=0,
which means
\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B}=f(\vec{x})=\text{const in time}.
According to Gauß's Law, which states that
\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B}=0
demands that f(\vec{x})=0. So again we see that the two homogeneous Maxwell equations are consistent.

There is also a consistency condition for the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations. This gives the conservation law of the electric charge, i.e., the continuity equation
\partial_t \rho+\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{j}=0.
 
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...
Thread 'Inducing EMF Through a Coil: Understanding Flux'
Thank you for reading my post. I can understand why a change in magnetic flux through a conducting surface would induce an emf, but how does this work when inducing an emf through a coil? How does the flux through the empty space between the wires have an effect on the electrons in the wire itself? In the image below is a coil with a magnetic field going through the space between the wires but not necessarily through the wires themselves. Thank you.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top