Is this an electromagnetic paradox?
This seems rather prosaic until you start thinking about "sources of E" in terms of what projects potential and magnetic vector potential A. The usual view of sourcing E is to write, such as from Feynamn Lectures II:
E = -Del phi - dA/dt,
and the source of phi is retarded 1/r^2 from dV of rho, and source of A is 1/r projection from current density j.
There is a problem here
1. Because this is a stable configuration there can't be a continuing dA/dt, and
2. magnets aren't really current loops (most of the B comes from axial electron quantum spin, not orbital motion anyway) so there isn't really a shifting of current density to project the changed phi.
We need to treat the spinning magnet poles as actual "pole currents" since it is misleading to pretend there are actual little loops with increased relativistically altered current densities in them. Yeah, amazing this wouldn't have been hashed out before, but there it is. Your thoughts?
5 Comments:
Consider another example of similar implications: an "infinite" (or very long) row of side-to-side bar magnets. The rows of N or S poles will produce B field like a long string of charge would an E field. If you move relative to that B, there must be E in your RF. Again, there is neither genuine net charge density nor dA/dt.
Understood the first 8 words... :)
This blog post could not be written any better! Going through this post reminds me of my previous roommate! He always kept talking about this. I am going to send this post to him. Fairly certain he's going to have a great read. Thank you for sharing!
Admission Essay Writing Service
thanks for your write, it is really nice to read thanks again.
see this link
Thanks for sharing about this electromagnetic paradox. This looks very interesting.
jeff (website)
Post a Comment
<< Home