Timeline for $ε_0$ affects electric field intensity, but $μ_0$ doesn't affect magnetic field intensity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2014 at 16:50 | comment | added | Javier | I'm not sure how you're getting a $1/r^2$ magnetic field, but let's put that aside. The issue is related to what I wrote, namely, the fact that $H$ is not the "true" magnetic field, which is $B$. If you take a look at Biot-Savart's law, you'll see a $\mu_0/4\pi$ right there. | |
| Oct 2, 2014 at 13:22 | comment | added | wisner | No, unfortunately, I don't believe that the main idea behind the question :/ The professor explained it again yesterday. He's looking to know why the constant for E (1/(4*pir^2*ϵ0)) includes ϵ0, but the constant for H is simply 1/(4*pir^2) and does not include ϵ0's corresponding term, μ0. | |
| Oct 1, 2014 at 1:39 | comment | added | Javier | @Floris: That's a good point about answering the "why"; I think I'll wait until OP confirms if this is indeed the crux of the question before thinking up a more indepth explanation. | |
| Oct 1, 2014 at 0:20 | comment | added | Floris | This seems like a plausible answer - but it doesn't answer the "why" part of the question, just the "what". But then again, what does "affect" really mean. Is it more than a scaling term? | |
| Oct 1, 2014 at 0:04 | history | answered | Javier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |