Codex @codex  0

Electrical conductivity $\sigma$ measures the local response of current density to electric field. In the rest frame of an isotropic Ohmic conductor, the local form of Ohm's law isLarger positive electrical conductivity gives larger current density at the same electric field. It is a bulk material coefficient, distinct from the geometry-dependent electrical conductance of a whole component and from a sheet's surface conductivity. Electrical resistivity is ${\rho }_{\mathrm{el}}=1/\sigma$ in this scalar model. ^[ref].

The local and whole-wire forms fit together particularly neatly. For uniform current in a straight homogeneous wire, with length $L$, wire cross-sectional area $A$, constant electrical conductivity and terminal electric potential difference $V$, the axial electric field has magnitude $E=V/L$. ThusFor the defined electrical resistance example $\sigma =5\times 10^5(\Omega \mathrm{m}{)}^{-1}$, $L=1\mathrm{m}$, $A=10^{-6}{\mathrm{m}}^2$ and $V=5\mathrm{V}$, the local values are $E=5V/m$ and $j=2.5\times 10^{6}A/{\mathrm{m}}^2$; integrating gives $I=2.5\mathrm{A}$. One material law therefore supplies both a spatial description and a terminal relation.

The scalar form requires isotropy. In an anisotropic material the response can instead be a tensor, $J_i={\sum }_j{\sigma }_{ij}{E}_j$, and current density need not be parallel to electric field; uniaxial conductivity tensor is one existing example. These statements concern the material's rest frame. A moving electrical conductor instead uses the moving-conductor Ohm law.

Use the real magnetic field $\mathcal{B}$ in the coupled equations; its leading periodic approximation will be $\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf{B}{e}^{i\omega t})$. In the conducting incompressible flow, the magnetohydrodynamic momentum equation, resistive induction equation and solenoidal magnetic-field constraint areHere $p$ is pressure, $\mathbf{j}$ is electric current density, and $\eta$ and $\nu$ are magnetic diffusivity and kinematic viscosity. The moving-conductor Ohm law gives $\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{u}\times \mathcal{B}+\eta \nabla \times \mathcal{B}$.

In the insulating exterior, neglecting displacement current, the magnetic field is curl-free away from the wire and solenoidal. The imposed electric current density suppliesThe exterior electric field also satisfies Faraday's law. At the rigid wall, impose the no-slip boundary condition $\mathbf{u}=0$. At finite conductivity, the interface conditions for electromagnetic fields give continuous normal magnetic field, continuous tangential magnetic field for equal permeability and no prescribed singular surface current, and continuous tangential electric field. The normal electric current density is zero at an insulating wall; it is automatic for the present two-dimensional fields with current only along $z$. The induced fields decay far from the wire and wall, and initial conditions, or selection of the periodic state after transients, complete the specification. In the limiting perfect conductor approximation a surface current can emerge, permitting a tangential-field jump.

The fully coupled solution need not remain monochromatic: a harmonic magnetic field produces both a mean and a twice-frequency Lorentz force density, and the resulting velocity can generate further harmonics. The following parts consistently use the leading magnetic response with fluid motion neglected.

Let ${\mathbf{x}}^{\prime }=\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{v}t$, $t^{\prime }=t$ for a constant relative velocity $\mathbf{v}$. The Galilean transformation gives ${\nabla }^{\prime }=\nabla$ and ${\partial }_{t^{\prime }}={\partial }_t+\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla$. In the magnetic Galilean limit of the pre-Maxwell equations, takeThe Ampère's law without displacement current and the solenoidal constraint are immediately unchanged. For Faraday's law, the constant-velocity vector identity is $\nabla \times (\mathbf{v}\times \mathbf{B})=\mathbf{v}\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}-(\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{B}$. ThusThese are transformations of the magnetic nonrelativistic approximation. The exact charge-current transformation also contains the convective term $-{\rho }_e\mathbf{v}$ in ${\mathbf{J}}^{\prime }$; ignoring it requires the quasineutral magnetic limit. They are not exact transformations of the full Maxwell equations.

Since ${\mathbf{u}}^{\prime }=\mathbf{u}-\mathbf{v}$, the combination ${\mathbf{E}}^{\prime }+{\mathbf{u}}^{\prime }\times {\mathbf{B}}^{\prime }$ equals $\mathbf{E}+\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}$. For an ideally conducting fluid the rest-frame electric field vanishes, so the ideal moving-conductor Ohm law is $\mathbf{E}+\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}=0$. Substitution in Faraday's law givesThe ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation requires nonrelativistic fluid motion, negligible displacement current, and negligible nonideal terms in the electric-field relation. In particular, magnetic diffusion must be slow compared with advection: the magnetic Reynolds number $\mathrm{Rm}=UL/{\eta }_m\gg 1$, where ${\eta }_m=({\mu }_0\sigma {)}^{-1}$ is the magnetic diffusivity. The single-fluid moving-conductor Ohm law must apply on the scales considered, with corrections to that relation negligible; viscosity is not itself excluded by this induction equation.

For a smooth ideal evolution, magnetic flux freezing states that the magnetic flux through every material surface is conserved and that magnetic field lines are carried with the fluid. Their connectivity is preserved: ideal smooth advection does not reconnect them. These implications are stated here without proof, as requested.

Use Faraday's law ${\partial }_t\mathbf{B}=-\nabla \times \mathbf{E}$ and the solenoidal magnetic-field constraint $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$. In the nonrelativistic, single-fluid approximation, neglect Hall and other nonideal electromotive terms and use the moving-conductor moving-conductor Ohm law, $\mathbf{E}+\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}=\mathbf{J}/\sigma$. Infinite electrical conductivity with finite current gives $\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}$, henceThis is the ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation. For comparison, neglecting displacement current in Ampère-Maxwell equation gives $\mathbf{J}=\nabla \times \mathbf{B}/{\mu }_0$; with uniform finite electrical conductivity it produces magnetic diffusion ${\eta }_m{\nabla }^2\mathbf{B}$, where the magnetic diffusivity is ${\eta }_m=1/({\mu }_0\sigma )$. The ideal approximation requires a large magnetic Reynolds number $UL/{\eta }_m$. Dropping displacement current is useful for this finite-conductivity comparison, but Faraday's law and the ideal Ohm relation already suffice for the ideal induction equation.

Expanding the curl and using the solenoidal magnetic-field constraint gives the material derivative formCombine this with mass conservation, $D\rho /Dt=-\rho \nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}$, to obtainNow parametrize a material curve by a fixed label $a$: $\mathbf{X}(a,t)$ obeys ${\partial }_t\mathbf{X}=\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{X},t)$. Differentiating with respect to $a$ shows that its tangent $\mathbf{\ell }={\partial }_a\mathbf{X}$ evolves by $D\mathbf{\ell }/Dt=(\mathbf{\ell }\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{u}$. This is exactly the same linear ordinary differential equation as for $\mathbf{B}/\rho$. Initially parallel tangents remain parallel by uniqueness, with a label-dependent proportionality factor constant along each particle trajectory. Thus magnetic field lines are transported as material curves, wherever the field and fluid flow are smooth and the field is nonzero. This is the field-line form of magnetic flux freezing.

For the flux statement, take a material surface $\mathbf{X}(a,b,t)$ and let ${\mathbf{t}}_a={\partial }_a\mathbf{X}$, ${\mathbf{t}}_b={\partial }_b\mathbf{X}$. Both tangents obey $D{t}_i/Dt=({\partial }_j{u}_i)t_j$. Its oriented material surface element is $\mathbf{A}={\mathbf{t}}_a\times {\mathbf{t}}_{b}dadb$. Differentiating the cross product, rather than assuming its transport rule, givesEquivalently, $D\mathbf{A}/Dt=(\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u})\mathbf{A}-(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}^T\mathbf{A}$, with $(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}_{ij}={\partial }_j{u}_i$. Contracting this derived rule with the induction equation gives a pointwise cancellation:Integrating over the fixed material labels therefore proves conservation of flux through an open material surface:The surface need not be closed; its boundary is carried with the fluid. The result follows from material transport, rather than from the zero flux through a closed surface.

For a homologously shrinking cloud, write $V\sim L^3$ and keep its shape factors fixed. Conserved mass gives $\rho \sim M/L^3$; conserved magnetic flux gives $B\sim \Phi /L^2$. Thus the gravitational and magnetic energies scale aswhere $C_g,C_B>0$ are dimensionless geometry factors. Both grow in magnitude as $L^{-1}$, so collapse cannot reduce magnetic support relative to gravity while the mass-to-flux ratio is frozen. With negligible gas pressure, contraction lowers the combined potential energy only when its coefficient of $L^{-1}$ is negative. Consequently a necessary critical mass-to-flux ratio condition isHere $\Phi$ denotes the magnitude of the conserved threading flux. The numerical coefficient depends on geometry and boundary conditions; the scaling argument does not determine it or make the condition sufficient in the presence of other support.

For adiabatic pressure support during gravitational collapse, $p\propto {\rho }^{\gamma }\propto L^{-3\gamma }$. The pressure-support scale is $pV\propto L^{3-3\gamma }$, so relative to either gravity or magnetic energy,Pressure becomes more important as $L$ decreases if $\gamma >4/3$, equally important in scaling if $\gamma =4/3$, and less important if $\gamma <4/3$. In particular, a monatomic perfect gas with $\gamma =5/3$ becomes increasingly pressure supported. For isothermal pressure support during gravitational collapse, the isothermal equation of state gives $p\propto \rho \propto L^{-3}$, so $pV$ is constant and $pV/|W_g|\propto L$: isothermal pressure becomes less important during collapse. The same comparisons hold against magnetic support because its energy has the same $L^{-1}$ scaling as gravity.