Why are electromagnetic forces body/volume forces?

AI Thread Summary
Electromagnetic forces are classified as body or volume forces because they act on all particles within a material, despite not affecting neutrons. While gravitational force impacts all mass equally, electromagnetic forces can vary based on particle charge and mass, leading to confusion about their classification. The discussion clarifies that even if electromagnetic forces only affect charged particles, they still influence the entire volume of the material. The distinction between force and acceleration is highlighted, noting that while protons experience a greater force due to their mass, both protons and electrons accelerate at the same rate under gravity. Misinterpretations of definitions regarding volume forces are acknowledged as a source of confusion.
Logerah
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I don't really get what the point of volume forces is, if electromagnetism is a volume force. Its obviously no surface force, but in my opinion the definition says that its no volume force as well. The link below describes volume forces as "a force acting on all particles (volume elements) of a given body and proportional to the mass of the particles. Gravitationalforce is an example of a volume force.".
But electromagnetic force doesn't affect neutrons. They also affect some particles more than others: electrons and protons have different mass and especially different charge.
Gravity is different. Every bit of mass is affected equally?!
Every source I found says its a body force so my thoughts must be wrong. Does anyone see where my mistake is?

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Volume+Force
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Logerah said:
But electromagnetic force doesn't affect neutrons.
That does not matter. Its effects are in the whole volume, not limited to the surface. An interaction that would only affect electrons would still be called "volume force" if it would act on all electrons in the material.

Logerah said:
Every bit of mass is affected equally?!
With the same argument as you used for the charge, you could say "protons are heavier, they are affected more by gravity".
 
Ok, thank you.. So I think the definitions I read are a bit misleading.
mfb said:
With the same argument as you used for the charge, you could say "protons are heavier, they are affected more by gravity".
Protons should fall with 9,81m/s² and electrons, too. So they actually get affected the same... Or am I mistaken? Are the protons of a body on Earth pulled down more? That doesn't really make sense to me...
 
Logerah said:
Protons should fall with 9,81m/s² and electrons, too. So they actually get affected the same...
Depends on what you call "the same" - same force or same acceleration?
For protons the force is larger. The acceleration is the same for both of course.
 
Susskind (in The Theoretical Minimum, volume 1, pages 203-205) writes the Lagrangian for the magnetic field as ##L=\frac m 2(\dot x^2+\dot y^2 + \dot z^2)+ \frac e c (\dot x A_x +\dot y A_y +\dot z A_z)## and then calculates ##\dot p_x =ma_x + \frac e c \frac d {dt} A_x=ma_x + \frac e c(\frac {\partial A_x} {\partial x}\dot x + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial y}\dot y + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial z}\dot z)##. I have problems with the last step. I might have written ##\frac {dA_x} {dt}...
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 ...
Back
Top