diff options
author | Prefetch | 2021-07-13 22:08:43 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Prefetch | 2021-07-13 22:08:43 +0200 |
commit | bffb355fd906723dcf7e587ce6ad16c751ed8abe (patch) | |
tree | 351548a9e02e82621eb8d0da20f27ac87008787d /content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc | |
parent | 197bbd585d86ca7091d13144b89441f64e9cfc6a (diff) |
Expand knowledge base
Diffstat (limited to 'content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc')
-rw-r--r-- | content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc | 129 |
1 files changed, 129 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc b/content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ce2c4fc --- /dev/null +++ b/content/know/concept/electric-field/index.pdc @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ +--- +title: "Electric field" +firstLetter: "E" +publishDate: 2021-07-12 +categories: +- Physics +- Electromagnetism + +date: 2021-07-12T09:46:25+02:00 +draft: false +markup: pandoc +--- + +## Electric field + +The **electric field** $\vb{E}$ is a vector field +that describes electric effects, +and is defined as the field that +correctly predicts the Lorentz force +on a particle with electric charge $q$: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{F} + = q \vb{E} +\end{aligned}$$ + +This definition implies that the direction of $\vb{E}$ +is from positive to negative charges, +since opposite charges attracts and like charges repel. + +If two opposite point charges with magnitude $q$ +are observed from far away, +they can be treated as a single object called a **dipole**, +which has an **electric dipole moment** $\vb{p}$ defined as follows, +where $\vb{d}$ is the vector going from +the negative to the positive charge (opposite direction of $\vb{E}$): + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{p} = q \vb{d} +\end{aligned}$$ + +Alternatively, for consistency with [magnetic fields](/know/concept/magnetic-field/), +$\vb{p}$ can be defined from the aligning torque $\vb{\tau}$ +experienced by the dipole when placed in an $\vb{E}$-field. +In other words, $\vb{p}$ satisfies: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{\tau} = \vb{p} \times \vb{E} +\end{aligned}$$ + +Where $\vb{p}$ has units of $\mathrm{C m}$. +The **polarization density** $\vb{P}$ is defined from $\vb{p}$, +and roughly speaking represents the moments per unit volume: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{P} \equiv \dv{\vb{p}}{V} + \:\:\iff\:\: + \vb{p} = \int_V \vb{P} \dd{V} +\end{aligned}$$ + +If $\vb{P}$ has the same magnitude and direction throughout the body, +then this becomes $\vb{p} = \vb{P} V$, where $V$ is the volume. +Therefore, $\vb{P}$ has units of $\mathrm{C / m^2}$. + +A nonzero $\vb{P}$ complicates things, +since it contributes to the field and hence modifies $\vb{E}$. +We thus define +the "free" **displacement field** $\vb{D}$ +from the "bound" field $\vb{P}$ +and the "net" field $\vb{E}$: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{D} \equiv \varepsilon_0 \vb{E} + \vb{P} + \:\:\iff\:\: + \vb{E} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0} (\vb{D} - \vb{P}) +\end{aligned}$$ + +Where the **electric permittivity of free space** $\varepsilon_0$ is a known constant. +It is important to point out some inconsistencies here: +$\vb{D}$ and $\vb{P}$ contain a factor of $\varepsilon_0$, +and therefore measure **flux density**, +while $\vb{E}$ does not contain $\varepsilon_0$, +and thus measures **field intensity**. +Note that this convention is the opposite +of the magnetic analogues $\vb{B}$, $\vb{H}$ and $\vb{M}$, +and that $\vb{M}$ has the opposite sign of $\vb{P}$. + +The polarization $\vb{P}$ is a function of $\vb{E}$. +In addition to the inherent polarity +of the material $\vb{P}_0$ (zero in most cases), +there is a possibly nonlinear response +to the applied $\vb{E}$-field: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{P} = + \vb{P}_0 + \varepsilon_0 \chi_e^{(1)} \vb{E} + + \varepsilon_0 \chi_e^{(2)} |\vb{E}| \: \vb{E} + + \varepsilon_0 \chi_e^{(3)} |\vb{E}|^2 \: \vb{E} + ... +\end{aligned}$$ + +Where the $\chi_e^{(n)}$ are the **electric susceptibilities** of the medium. +For simplicity, we often assume that only the $n\!=\!1$ term is nonzero, +which is the linear response to $\vb{E}$. +In that case, we define +the **relative permittivity** $\varepsilon_r \equiv 1 + \chi_e^{(1)}$ +and the **absolute permittivity** $\varepsilon \equiv \varepsilon_r \varepsilon_0$, +so that: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{D} + = \varepsilon_0 \vb{E} + \vb{P} + = \varepsilon_0 \vb{E} + \varepsilon_0 \chi_e^{(1)} \vb{E} + = \varepsilon_0 \varepsilon_r \vb{E} + = \varepsilon \vb{E} +\end{aligned}$$ + +In reality, a material cannot respond instantly to $\vb{E}$, +meaning that $\chi_e^{(1)}$ is a function of time, +and that $\vb{P}$ is the convolution of $\chi_e^{(1)}(t)$ and $\vb{E}(t)$: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \vb{P}(t) + = (\chi_e^{(1)} * \vb{E})(t) + = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \chi_e^{(1)}(t - \tau) \: \vb{E}(\tau) \:d\tau +\end{aligned}$$ + +Note that this definition requires $\chi_e^{(1)}(t) = 0$ for $t < 0$ +in order to ensure causality, +which leads to the [Kramers-Kronig relations](/know/concept/kramers-kronig-relations/). |