5
$\begingroup$

$U=-B\cdot \mu$ is defined to be the magnetic potential energy, I saw this in my lecture notes, but we had already talked about the fact that since the work done to move a charge there is path dependant, there can not be a unique potential at a point in a magnetic field. So there is no use in defining a magnetic potential energy.

The only thing I have in my notes is that it shows for a current loop, it has the most potential energy when the magnetic moment is perpendicular to the field, and has 0 potential energy when it is parallel. I can sort of justify this by saying it makes sense that the potential should be a maximum in an orientation where there is the most restoring torque on the loop and minimum where there is none

But what does a potential mean in a non conservative field?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

The problem you're having is that your confusing a field's scalar "potential" with potential energy. The concepts are related, but in a particular way. Say I have a vector field $\mathbf{V}(\mathbf{x})$. There is a mathematical theorem that I can break this field down into two two parts $$\mathbf{V}(\mathbf{x}) = -\nabla \Phi + \nabla\times\mathbf{A},$$ $\Phi$ is something we call $\mathbf{V}$'s scalar potential and $\mathbf{A}$ is its vector potential.

The connection to potential energy comes in if we can write a force on some particle is of the form $$\mathbf{F} = a \mathbf{V}$$ and $\mathbf{A} = 0$, then the potential energy of that particle will be $U = a\Phi$.

So, in the case you're dealing with you don't have a force of needed form, so it's not a problem. Granted, we still have the statement, "The magnetic field can do no work," but showing how that works out in the case of a magnetic dipole like this is subtle. In fact, the force and torque on a magnetic dipole are \begin{align} \mathbf{F} & = \left(\mathbf{\mu}\cdot\nabla\right)\mathbf{B} \text{ and} \\ \mathbf{\tau} & = \mathbf{\mu}\times \mathbf{B}. \end{align} I'm less certain here, but I'm pretty sure you'll find that the combination of those two makes it impossible to harvest infinite energy from any static magnetic field.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Are you saying the electric field set up by the current loop does the work, and the magnetic potential energy is just a store of the electric fields KE? I dont think I understand your answer, sorry can you please clarify. $\endgroup$ May 24, 2019 at 7:59
  • $\begingroup$ @VishalJain Completely reworked answer. It's possible to make what was said in the old answer relevant, but it requires a bit of work. $\endgroup$ May 24, 2019 at 8:26
  • $\begingroup$ To summarise, you are saying since the vector potential is non zero, the potential energy is not just the scalar potential, which is what gravitational and electric potential is. I understand that my definition of potential energy is the issue, but if the potential energy isnt just the scalar potential, what physical significance does the vector potential have. I understand the scalar potential as the work to move a charge from infinity to a point, what analog can be used for the vector potential? $\endgroup$ May 24, 2019 at 8:35
  • $\begingroup$ The magnetic vector potential is difficult to interpret. See, you recall how we can shift the scalar potential by a constant value and no physics changes? Well, it turns out that's a smaller part of something called a "gauge transform" that makes a large chunk of $\mathbf{A}$ arbitrary. Point being, that's a separate question, not a comment on an answer. $\endgroup$ May 24, 2019 at 8:49
  • $\begingroup$ ill cross that bridge when i get to it, thanks $\endgroup$ May 24, 2019 at 9:11

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.