1
$\begingroup$

Let $B$ be the magnetic field. If

$$\nabla \times B = 0$$ and of course $$\nabla \cdot B= 0$$

Can we conclude that $B=0$?

For a general field it is wrong because every constant vector will satisfy those conditions.

But for the magnetic field is it enough?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ $\nabla\times B=\mu_0J+\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial J}{\partial t}$ $\endgroup$
    – Jim
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 16:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Jim Yes I know that is maxwell's equation. That is why I've said if $\nabla \times B = 0$ ... $\endgroup$
    – Ant
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 16:51
  • $\begingroup$ Maxwell's equation is $\nabla\times \mathbf B=\mu_0 \mathbf j+\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial \mathbf E}{\partial t}$ $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 19:49
  • $\begingroup$ @JánLalinský thanks for the clarification, even though I'm sure Jim's error was just a typo :) $\endgroup$
    – Ant
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 19:53

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

No, that is not enough to say that $B=0$. You must also consider that $$\nabla\times E=-\frac{\partial B}{\partial t}$$ which means that for a magnetic field that is constant spatially but not in time, your conditions would be true but your $B$ field would not be $0$

If, however, we had a case where $\nabla\times E=0$ as well, then (aside from being a very boring situation) we could say that $B=0$. This is done as a simplification tactic. In this case, the $B$ field is constant over space and time. It also means that the $B$ field cannot be affecting any charges because if it were, those charges would accelerate, which would change the $E$ field. Changing the $E$ field means that the curl of $B$ would not be $0$ and $B$ would not be a constant. Thus, since $B=const$, it must not affect charges. Since it does not contribute to $E$ and since it does not affect anything else, we can simplify any calculations by assuming that $B=0$.

The physical meaning of this is that we are letting the background magnetic field that exists everywhere and is unchanging be zero. Similar to the electric potential, we can set the background to be zero and just measure the difference in $B$ between the background and the field of interest. Or, that's at least one way to interpret it.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ But if $\nabla \times E = 0$? $\endgroup$
    – Ant
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 16:57
  • $\begingroup$ if all three of those are zero, then yes, you can say $B=0$. But it is a fairly uninteresting situation. $\endgroup$
    – Jim
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 16:58
  • $\begingroup$ Okay but how can you get to that conclusion? $B = [3; \ 2; \ 1]$ satisfy all the conditions; why do you say $B = 0$? $\endgroup$
    – Ant
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 17:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If the three conditions you mentioned are met, then $B$ is a constant in space and time. Because it cannot have an effect on any charges (which would change the $E$ field and thus, change$B$ making it not a constant), we can effectively re-scale the problem and set $B=0$ without any concern of consequences. It is a simplification tactic $\endgroup$
    – Jim
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 17:07
  • $\begingroup$ I see. Could you please expand your answer and include why exactly we can simplify without concern and set $B = 0$ and why it has physical meaning? $\endgroup$
    – Ant
    Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 17:10
1
$\begingroup$

Can we conclude that B=0? For a general field it is wrong because every constant vector will satisfy those conditions. But for the magnetic field is it enough?

It depends on what facts about magnetic field you want to admit into your hypothetical situation. If you assume the Maxwell equations with vanishing sources and the condition $\nabla \times \mathbf B = \mathbf 0$, the magnetic field can still be non-zero. For any function of position and time $f(\mathbf r)$ that obeys the Laplace equation $$ \Delta f = 0 $$ the vector field $$ \mathbf B = \nabla f $$ obeys your two conditions. Case $\mathbf B =\mathbf 0$ is a very special one. The same conclusion holds if in addition you assume presence of static electric charges.

If in addition you assume presence of electric currents, th current density and electric field have to obey the equation $$ \mathbf j = -\epsilon_0 \frac{\partial \mathbf E}{\partial t} $$ to make sure $\nabla \times\! \mathbf B= \mathbf 0$. In other words, current density and displacement current density have to cancel each other everywhere. I cannot think of any situation where this could happen. In most cases, it doesn't and $\nabla \times \mathbf B$ isn't $\mathbf 0$ everywhere.

$\endgroup$

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.