2
$\begingroup$

$u$ is the e&m field energy

$\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=H\cdot \frac{\partial B}{\partial t}+E\cdot \frac{\partial D}{\partial t}$

Compared with thermo physics: $PdV,TdS,\mu dN$

${H,E,P,T,\mu}$ are intensive variables

${B,D,V,S,N}$ are extensive variables

But in microscopic level, there is no $H$ field. $B$ should be more meaningful.

My question is, why are $H$ and $E$ intensive variable. Why are $D$ and $B$ extensive variables?

I think all of them $E,D,H,B$ should be intensive, because energy density $u$ itself is an intensive variable.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ It is not clear why you think D,B are extensive variables. D,B,E,H are fields. In thermodynamics, fields are closer to intensive thermodynamics variables such as $P,T$ - just as you think they should be. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ Wait, what are $B$ and $D$? $\endgroup$
    – pho
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 6:04
  • $\begingroup$ @PranavHosangadi "magnetic flux density" and "electric displacement field," respectively. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 6:05
  • $\begingroup$ $EdD$,$HdB$ can also be written as $\rho \delta \Phi$,$\vec{j}\cdot \delta \vec{A}$. But the respective $Q$,$I$ of $\rho$,$\vec{j}$ have more extensive nature than $\Phi$ and $\vec{A}$. And I wonder why can't we write $DdE,BdH ,\Phi\delta\rho,\vec{A}\cdot \delta \vec{j} $ as infinitesimal work ? Just like in thermophysics, $PdV$ is true,but not $VdP$. $\endgroup$
    – Jian
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 18:49
  • $\begingroup$ @wwwjjj: $\rho$ and ${\vec J}$ are very definitely INtensive -- they are densities. For constant $\rho$ and $\vec j$, $\Phi$ and ${\vec A}$ are extensive -- you add more charge, you get larger potentials at the surface. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 19:37

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Think of $D$ and $B$ as $D=\epsilon _0 E + P$ and $B=\mu_0 H + M$, resp. Now the electric and magnetic polarization densities $P$ and $M$ are volumetric densities of extensive quantities, because the total polarization of the material is proportional to the amount of matter present in the field, hence $P$ and $M$ correspond to "extensive" variables when energy exchange is considered. Fields that induce the polarizations are naturally intensive parameters, and indeed $EdP$ or $HdM$ is the electric/magnetic work expended to which one may add the field energy $\frac{1}{2} \epsilon_0 E^2$ and $\frac{1}{2} \mu_0 H^2$ in the absence of the ponderable matter and obtain the total differential work $\epsilon_0 EdE + EdP = EdD$ or $\mu_0 HdH + HdM = HdB$ but neither $D$ nor $B$ is "extensive" in a conventional sense instead its respective polarization is extensive.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ $EdD$,$HdB$ can also be written as $\rho \delta \Phi$,$\vec{j}\cdot \delta \vec{A}$ but the respective $Q$,$I$ of $\rho$,$\vec{j}$ have more extensive nature than $\Phi$ and $\vec{A}$ $\endgroup$
    – Jian
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 18:34
1
$\begingroup$

Are you referring to intensive and extensive properties? This makes little sense to me for field variables, but it does make a little, so I'll roll with it.

E is the electric field, including the permittivity of the material it is passing through. D does not include permittivity but only reflects the charge contained in a region of space, and the flux sent through an enclosing surface by that charge. If I put one coulomb of electric charge on a metal ball, Gauss's law applied over any region including the ball will account for exactly one coulomb. On the other hand, if I integrate E without adjustment, the result will depend on the permittivity of other objects on the surface of the region.

Likewise with B and Ampere's law: to recover the amount of current from H you need to know permeability along the line of integration.

Note the section "Generality of classification" at the end of the above Wikipedia link. Extension of the intensive/extensive construct to field variables is not condoned by IUPAC, since the principle of dividing the system doesn't hold. Such properties only apply to a discrete subsystem, not to a homogeneous material.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ $EdD$,$HdB$ can also be written as $\rho \delta \Phi$,$\vec{j}\cdot \delta \vec{A}$. But the respective $Q$,$I$ of $\rho$,$\vec{j}$ have more extensive nature than $\Phi$ and $\vec{A}$. And I wonder why can't we write $DdE,BdH ,\Phi\delta\rho,\vec{A}\cdot \delta \vec{j} $ as infinitesimal energy ? $\endgroup$
    – Jian
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 18:42
  • $\begingroup$ Just like in thermophysics, $PdV$ is true,but not $VdP$. $\endgroup$
    – Jian
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 18:45
  • $\begingroup$ How are Q and I extensive? They are contained within the given subsystem. There is an assumption that these systems won't be divided. $\rho$ is more like an intensive chemical property, but no vector field is like that… if you want to consider any vector field as intensive, you need to decide on another model, and IUPAC at least made a decision not to do that. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 2:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.