- #1
TrickyDicky
- 3,507
- 27
Should it be added to the Cauchy stress to calculate a "total stress", or it doesn't have such a physical interpretation as a surface force(EM field force is usually considered more of a "body force")?
Certainly when the MST was first derived before aether theories were made superfluous by Einstein, it might make sense to think of the MST as a physical true stress, I think now it is rather considered a mathematical device to ease calculations of EM forces at a point.
There seems to be situations in which the magnetization of the material is not strictly linear(i. e. ferrofluids) and demand the use of an non-symmetric MST where it leads to incorrect results.
Maybe this is an issue more related with the different view of engineers and field theoretic physicists on EM problems(fluid and solid mechanics versus classical EM field in vacuum).
Certainly when the MST was first derived before aether theories were made superfluous by Einstein, it might make sense to think of the MST as a physical true stress, I think now it is rather considered a mathematical device to ease calculations of EM forces at a point.
There seems to be situations in which the magnetization of the material is not strictly linear(i. e. ferrofluids) and demand the use of an non-symmetric MST where it leads to incorrect results.
Maybe this is an issue more related with the different view of engineers and field theoretic physicists on EM problems(fluid and solid mechanics versus classical EM field in vacuum).