Codex @codex  0

The integral field equation. The Ampere-Maxwell law is $\nabla \times \mathbf{H}=\mathbf{J}+{\partial }_t\mathbf{D}$. Apply Stokes theorem to any fixed oriented surface bounded by the chosen contour:The added displacement current is required for compatibility with electric charge conservation. Taking a divergence and using $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{D}={\rho }_f$ gives $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{J}+{\partial }_t{\rho }_f=0$.

Field geometry. Choose the upper plate positive and let $z$ increase upward. In the long-plate, slow-discharge approximation, $\mathbf{E}=-(V/d)\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. Conventional wire current runs downward from the positive plate. The magnetic field intensity circulates clockwise as viewed from above. The Poynting vector $\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{E}\times \mathbf{H}$ points radially toward the resistive wire.

Wire and displacement currents. The capacitance and discharge law areBecause $V$ decreases, ${\partial }_t\mathbf{D}$ points upward, opposing the downward wire current. Through a disk of radius $r$ between the plates its magnitude isThe effective downward current enclosed by the circular contour is therefore $I-I_D(r)$. The Ampere-Maxwell law givesThis is the magnitude; with the stated coordinates, $\mathbf{H}=-H\hat{\mathbf{\varphi }}$. The factor $1-r^2/a^2$ expresses cancellation between conduction and displacement currents. The approximation requires distances outside the thin wire and away from detailed electrode-edge fields.

Energy flux and power. Since $\hat{\mathbf{z}}\times \hat{\mathbf{\varphi }}=-\hat{\mathbf{r}}$,Its units are watts per square metre. Integrating over the cylinder's side area $2\pi rd$, the signed outward power is negative:There is no leading axial flux through the cylinder's ends in this ideal field geometry.

Where the energy goes. The Poynting flux in a centrally discharged parallel-plate capacitor carries field energy through the dielectric space into the resistor, where it becomes Joule heating at rate $V^2/R$. Inside radius $r$ the stored electric energy isHenceThe resistor receives the inward flux from outside that cylinder plus the field energy released inside it. As $r$ approaches the wire radius, essentially all its power arrives as radial electromagnetic flux. Over the whole capacitor, $-d(C{V}^2/2)/dt=V^2/R$. The Poynting theorem thus accounts for the complete discharge without treating energy as transported only along the conducting wire. High resistance makes the quasistatic electric-field approximation and neglect of changing magnetic energy consistent.

Parameterize the loop by ${\mathbf{r}}^{\prime }=(a\cos \varphi ,a\sin \varphi ,0)$ and choose positive electric current counterclockwise as seen from $+z$. At the observation point $\mathbf{r}=(0,0,z)$,The numerator of the Biot-Savart law isThe distance $\sqrt{a^2+z^2}$ is constant round the loop. The transverse terms integrate to zero, while the axial term integrates to $2\pi a^2$. HenceFor use below, define the undisturbed magnetic field intensity $H_0(z)=B_0(z)/{\mu }_0=a^{2}I/[2(a^2+z^2{)}^{3/2}]$. This distinguishes the applied field from the internal field after adding the magnetic sample.

Changing shape changes the demagnetizing field, and hence the magnetization induced by the same applied magnetic field intensity. For a small linear sample in the ellipsoid approximation, the force magnitude scales withFor $\mu >1$, a more elongated body aligned with the field has smaller $N_d$ and a stronger response. A sphere has $N_d=1/3$, giving ${\chi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=3(\mu -1)/(\mu +2)$; a very thin plate with field normal to it has $N_d\to 1$, giving $(\mu -1)/\mu$. Thus an axially slender rod generally experiences a stronger attraction than a sphere or a transverse thin plate of the same material and volume, within the linear uniform-applied-field approximation.

The shape response is precisely why the $1/\mu$ factor in part (c) cannot apply universally to every small magnetic body. Orientation also matters through the appropriate principal demagnetizing factor; for general nonellipsoidal bodies the internal field is not uniform and a single scalar correction need not be exact.

The Poynting vector is the local electromagnetic energy flux density:Here $\mathbf{E}$ is the electric field and $\mathbf{H}$ the magnetic field intensity. For an oriented area element $d\mathbf{S}$, $\mathbf{N}\cdot d\mathbf{S}$ is the electromagnetic power crossing that element in its positive normal direction. Thus ${\int }_S\mathbf{N}\cdot d\mathbf{S}$ is outward power through a closed surface, in watts. The Poynting vector has units $\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$, and its direction describes local electromagnetic energy transport.

Let the unit normal $\mathbf{n}$ point from material 1 to material 2, and let their relative magnetic permeabilities be ${\mu }_1,{\mu }_2$, so ${\mathbf{B}}_i={\mu }_0{\mu }_i{\mathbf{H}}_i$ for linear isotropic media. Apply Gauss's law for magnetism to an infinitesimal Gaussian pillbox straddling the interface. The side contribution vanishes as its height tends to zero, leavingThe normal magnetic flux density is continuous.

Next use a narrow rectangular Amperian loop crossing the interface. The two short-side contributions vanish in the zero-height limit. The magnetostatic Ampère law for magnetic field intensity giveswhere ${\mathbf{K}}_f$ is any free surface current density. Thus, if there is no free surface current density on the interface, the tangential magnetic field intensity is continuous. In that case the component relations areThe distinction between free and bound electric currents matters: bound currents due to magnetization are already incorporated in the definition of magnetic field intensity. A change of magnetic permeability alone does not make the tangential magnetic flux density continuous.

For the closed untapered torus, apply the magnetostatic Ampère law to a circular path through the core. It links all $N$ turns, each carrying electric current $I$:Since $L\gg R$, variation of the path length and of the tangential magnetic field intensity across the section is negligible. Thus $H_{\mathrm{in}}L\simeq NI$, giving, within this thin-torus approximation,The units are $\mathrm{A}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$. The core magnetic flux density is $B_{\mathrm{in}}={\mu }_0\mu NI/L$ in the linear material model.

Let the approximately conserved magnetic flux be $\Phi$. ThenThe length $L$ shown in the original diagram is the untapered core arc; the two tapers are separate lengths $s$ each. In the untapered core, flux conservation givesFor one taper use distance $u$ from its narrow end. The straight taper in the diagram has local radiusand magnetic field intensityIts contribution to the line integral in the magnetostatic Ampère law is found explicitly:Adding the gap, the untapered arc and both tapers givesThereforeThis uses a linear radius profile, approximately uniform magnetic flux density over each section, a linear constant magnetic permeability, and negligible leakage and magnetic fringing. For a non-linear taper profile $a(u)$ the honest generalization isThus an arbitrary smooth taper with the same end radii and length need not give the printed formula; the straight-sided geometry supplies the additional information.

Set $\alpha =r/R<1$. Comparing with the untapered expression in part (d), using the same $N,I,\mu ,h,L$ and large radius $R$,The stated limit $s/L\ll \alpha$ makes $2s\alpha \ll L{\alpha }^2$, soThe taper concentrates magnetic flux into a smaller pole-face area, increasing the gap magnetic field intensity and magnetic flux density for the same winding electric current. If $\mu h\ll L{\alpha }^2$, the enhancement approaches $1/{\alpha }^2=(R/r{)}^2$. If instead $\mu h\gg L$, the gap dominates the magnetic reluctance and the enhancement approaches unity: both fields approach $NI/h$.

The benefit is therefore strongest when the untapered core's contribution is significant, while the taper lengths contribute little. The same-core-length convention is the comparison defined by parts (d) and (e); if one instead fixes the full iron path length, the untapered comparator has length $L+2s$, a difference negligible in the stated limit. A smaller gap area can increase the field even though the total magnetic flux need not increase. Magnetic saturation and magnetic fringing, excluded from this model, limit the ideal concentration.

Here $\mathbf{H}$ is magnetic field intensity, $\mathbf{J}$ free electric current density, and $\mathbf{D}$ electric displacement. In vacuum, $\mathbf{B}={\mu }_0\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{D}={ϵ}_0\mathbf{E}$. Integrating the equation gives Ampère's circuital law with displacement current; in a steady state the displacement term vanishes.

Take $z$ upward and define $V={\varphi }_{\mathrm{upper}}-{\varphi }_{\mathrm{lower}}=V_0\sin \omega t$. Neglect fringing and use the low-frequency thin-capacitor approximation. ThenInside the gap, a circular Ampère loop encloses only displacement current:Because $\hat{\mathbf{z}}\times \hat{\mathbf{\varphi }}=-\hat{\mathbf{r}}$, the Poynting vector isIt points inward while the electrical energy is increasing and outward while it decreases. The net power entering the curved side isThis is the leading quasistatic energy balance. The time-averaged field energies areFor the axisymmetric high-frequency capacitor field when $\omega a/c$ is not small, induction and radial propagation prevent a spatially uniform $E_z$. In an ideal axially uniform axisymmetric interior model, Faraday's and Ampère's equations giveThe solution regular at the axis and normalized to the central voltage is approximatelyAt $\omega =\pi c/a$, the radial profile is $J_0(\pi r/a)$: its first zero is at $r\simeq 0.765a$, and the edge has opposite phase, $J_0(\pi )\simeq -0.304$. This is an illustrative thin-disc interior profile; the exact driven high-frequency field also depends on the feed and edge/radiation boundary conditions. Continuing the uniform quasistatic field would be inconsistent.

In a weak applied field, magnetic susceptibility relates magnetization to magnetic field intensity, $M=\chi H$. Its sign, temperature dependence and nonlinear field dependence distinguish several mechanisms.

Diamagnetism is the orbital response opposing an applied magnetic field, with $\chi <0$. Closed-shell atoms and filled bands generally give a weak, nearly temperature-independent response. In a simple free electron metal, Landau diamagnetism contributes ${\chi }_L=-{\chi }_P/3$; the factor is specific to the isotropic parabolic-band model and is not universal in crystals.

Paramagnetism gives $\chi >0$. Localized magnetic moments align statistically with the field against thermal disorder. For independent moments of angular momentum $J$,which is the Curie law. Exchange interactions often lead approximately to the Curie–Weiss law, $\chi =C/(T-\Theta )$, sufficiently far above any ordering temperature. The sign of $\Theta$ suggests predominantly parallel or antiparallel exchange, though it is not a complete classification. Conduction electrons instead exhibit Pauli paramagnetism:for $g\simeq 2$ and a spin-summed density of states per unit volume. Only states close to the Fermi energy change occupation, making this response nearly temperature independent when $k_{B}T\ll E_F$.

Ferromagnetism has spontaneous parallel magnetic order below a Curie temperature. Exchange interaction, not simply classical dipole attraction, provides the dominant alignment mechanism. In the convention $H=-J_{\mathrm{ex}}{\sum }_{⟨ij⟩}{\mathbf{S}}_i\cdot {\mathbf{S}}_j$, positive $J_{\mathrm{ex}}$ favours alignment. Magnetic domains can make a ferromagnet's total magnetization vanish before an external field aligns its domains. Domain motion and anisotropy produce saturation, hysteresis, remanent magnetization and a reverse field measured by magnetic coercivity.

Antiferromagnetism has oppositely ordered sublattices below a Néel temperature; equal opposing moments give zero net magnetization while retaining a nonzero staggered order parameter. A susceptibility anomaly and magnetic neutron diffraction reveal this order even when bulk magnetization vanishes. Ferrimagnetism also has opposing sublattices but unequal contributions, giving a nonzero spontaneous net moment. Above their ordering temperatures both can become paramagnetic. Measurements with a magnetometer as a function of field and temperature, supplemented by magnetic diffraction, therefore distinguishes a compensated ordered material from an ordinary paramagnet.

As an original stipulated low-field model, take the axial magnetic field intensity $H$ in $A/m$ and prescribeAll strain components are dimensionless, and their trace vanishes. This is an even, quasistatic, unsaturated toy law with a fixed measuring axis. It is distinct from the fixed-magnitude directional model in saturated isotropic magnetostrictive strain. In particular, one must not replace local unit magnetization by normalized net magnetization in a many-domain specimen and assume this law follows.

For $H(t)=H_0\sin (2\pi ft)$, $H_0=20kA/m$, and $f=50\mathrm{Hz}$, a trigonometric identity givesThe axial strain ranges from zero to $20\times 10^{-6}$, with mean $10\times 10^{-6}$ and a $100\mathrm{Hz}$ component of amplitude $10\times 10^{-6}$. The cosine coefficient is negative with the chosen time origin. For $L=100\mathrm{mm}$ the length ranges from zero to $2\mu \mathrm{m}$ relative to $H=0$. There is no $50\mathrm{Hz}$ term in this unbiased model.

A static bias $H_b$ changes the conclusion. Expanding $\kappa [H_b+H_0\sin (2\pi ft){]}^2$ produces a fundamental-frequency term $2\kappa H_b{H}_0\sin (2\pi ft)$ as well as the doubled-frequency term. This is an incremental linear response about a state with a chosen magnetic axis; it does not contradict isotropic linear magnetostriction vanishes at an unbiased isotropic reference. Real hysteresis, thermal expansion from Joule heating, and mechanical resonance can add further components or change their phases. Frequency alone cannot identify the cause of motion: Joule heating also contains an even-in-electric current contribution.

For an ellipsoidal sample in a uniform applied magnetic field intensity $H_0$ along a principal axis, its uniform demagnetizing field is $-N_{d}M$. The SI demagnetizing factor obeys $0\le N_d\le 1$. Linear magnetic susceptibility $\chi ={\mu }_r-1$ gives $M=\chi (H_0-N_{d}M)$, hence $M=\chi H_0/(1+N_d\chi )$. An axially slender prolate limit has $N_d\to 0$, a sphere has $N_d=1/3$, and a thin plate with field normal to it has $N_d\to 1$. Thus $M=({\mu }_r-1)H_0/{\mu }_r$ belongs to the plate limit, not the slender axial-rod limit. A finite cylinder generally has nonuniform magnetization; an effective ellipsoidal factor is an approximation rather than an exact universal correction.

On a connected bounded domain, two harmonic potentials with the same normal derivative differ by a constant. Their difference $u$ has ${\nabla }^{2}u=0$ and ${\partial }_{n}u=0$. Green's first identity gives $\int |\nabla u{|}^{2}dV={\int }_{\partial \Omega }u{\partial }_{n}udA=0$, so the gradient vanishes. In a multiply connected magnetic core, also fix the circulation around each independent hole: a curl-free magnetic field intensity with nonzero circulation need not be the gradient of a single-valued scalar potential. After those circulations have been matched, apply the scalar-potential uniqueness argument to the difference field.

Volume magnetic susceptibility is the dimensionless ratio of longitudinal magnetization to internal magnetic field intensity in a linear regime through the origin. Positive response gives paramagnetism. Always distinguish magnetization $M=\mathcal{M}/V$ from total magnetic moment $\mathcal{M}$: dividing by volume changes the normalization. Mass-normalized and mole-normalized values likewise require the mass density or the volume per amount of substance before comparison with ${\chi }_v$.

In the existing Pauli paramagnetism formula, $M$ denotes total magnetic moment, and $g(E_F)$ is the total spin-summed density of states. Relabel that response asHere ${\mu }_B$ is the Bohr magneton. If its $B$ is a prescribed vacuum/applied magnetic flux density $B_0={\mu }_0{H}_{\mathrm{app}}$, the dimensionless apparent slope is ${\mu }_0{\chi }_B^{\mathrm{vol}}$. It agrees approximately with intrinsic ${\chi }_v$ only when the demagnetizing field correction and magnetic feedback are negligible. The existing Curie's law formula also uses a total-magnetic moment, $B$-derivative convention; its $N$ counts moments rather than giving a number density.