2
$\begingroup$

since we can get the charge conservation from ampere's law i was wondering is this the only physical interpretation of ampere's law ,what can be the more physical interpretations of ampere's law both in differential and integral form

$\endgroup$

closed as unclear what you're asking by tpg2114, Norbert Schuch, heather, Jon Custer, Kyle Kanos Jan 1 '17 at 15:29

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean by a "physical interpretation"? What specifically do you want us to explain? $\endgroup$ – probably_someone Dec 31 '16 at 11:31
  • $\begingroup$ I want the meaning of equation in both forms the best way i can think of , the way i can visualise each term and the relation between the entities described. $\endgroup$ – Syed Ilyas Dec 31 '16 at 12:06
2
$\begingroup$

It is convention not to reference corollaries of an equation (like charge conservation) as " a physical interpretation" of the equation. In differential form, Ampere's law states that

$$\nabla\times\mathbf{B}=\mu_0\mathbf{J} +\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{E}}{\partial t}$$

Personally, I think that what this equation states physically is not obvious. For this reason, when people look for physical interpretations of one of the Maxwell equations, they refer to the integral form. In integral form, Ampere's law is

$$\oint_{\partial R}\mathbf{B}\cdot d\mathbf{l}=\mu_0\iint_R\mathbf{J}\cdot d\mathbf{a}\ + \mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\iint_R\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{a}$$

Note that $R$ denote's to the region of integration, and $\partial R$ is just notation that refers to the boundary of the region of integration $R$. What the second equation states is a bit more transparent. Now give your self some region $R$, and orient the curve enclosing that area $\partial R$ in some direction (say clockwise for definiteness).

This equation states that if you go around the curve $\partial R$ and measure how much the magnetic field is in the direction of an arrow pointing in the "forward" direction (i.e. the direction of orientation) and then add all of that up, that is the same quantity just counting how much current is passing through $R$ $plus$ how many electric field lines are passing through $R$ per unit time.

Most succinctly, one could simply say that magnetic fields are caused by currents and time changing electric fields through some region $R$. This is perhaps best for what you should carry in your head and should remember as the qualitative content of Ampere's law.

$\endgroup$

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