You are on page 1of 5

# The Law of Electrodynamics

by H. ASPDEN

ABSTRACT:

Laboratories,

Ltd.

in

action to

between with

is reviewed.

consistent

## This law points

anomalies
chargein electric

to be expected
mass ratio.

electrodynamic

electric particles

of unequal anomalies

## This result may account for certain hitherto unexplained phenomena.

discharge

introduction

A summary of the early development of the law of electrodynamic action between current elements is given by Tricker (1). He presents the basic paper of Ampere on this subject, and the criticisms sustained by Amperes law and alternative formulations by Biot and Savart and by Grassmann. Also mentioned is the general empirical formulation by Whittaker (2) in which he proposes a simplified new law based upon new assumptions. The common problem is that none of these laws is fully consistent with Newtons Third Law when applied to interactions between individual elements of current. Yet, all the formulations appear to give the correct answers when used in integrated form to apply to interactions involving a closed circuit. Tricker then reaches the seemingly inevitable conclusion that an isolated element of steady current is a contradiction in terms, and thus leaves open the problem of how two electrons in motion really react owing to their electrodynamic interaction. Here, it is proposed to apply directly Newtonian principles to the problem of two interacting particles. From very simple considerations a formulation of the law of interaction is deduced which is fully consistent with the empirically derived general formula of electrodynamics but, oddly enough, is different from the laws deduced, by assumption, by Ampere, Biot and Savart, Grassmann, and Whittaker.
Empirical Analysis

Four basic empirical facts were relied upon by Ampere in deriving his law : (a) The effect of a current is reversed when the direction of the current is reversed. (b) The effect of a current flowing in a circuit twisted into small sinuosities is the same as if the circuit were smoothed out.

179
13*

Brief Communications (c) The force exerted by a closed circuit on an element of another circuit is at right angles to the latter. (d) The force between two elements of circuits is unaffected when all linear dimensions are increased proportionately, the current-strengths remaining unaltered. Ampere combined with the above the assumption that the force between two current elements acts along the line joining them, and thus obtained his law: p = Eii, 3(z.r)(&.F) (
r5 -

2(&X)
p3 1

r
* (1)

## Here, F denotes the force acting upon an element z

of a circuit of current

strength i and due to a current i in an element z. The line from d7E to & is the vector distance F; Ic is arbitrary and depends upon the units chosen, although its polarity may be determined by using the law to verify the observation : (e) Two extended parallel circuit elements in close proximity mutually repel one another when carrying current in opposite directions, or attract when carrying current in the same direction. Prom the analysis by Whittaker (2), disregarding Amperes assumption, the general formulation consistent with obs&vations (a) to (d) is found to be: F = /& 3(&F)(Z.i)F r5 ( 2(Z.Z7I;+4&.F)Z~ r3 r3 I.

- B(&.@ _

(2)

## then assumed linear

force balance as represented by symmetry in & and &. This involves equating A and -B. In its simplest form, with k and A both equal to unity, the law becomes

P=

~{(~.r)~+(~.~)~-(d7;.~)r}.

(3)

Inspection shows that this formulation satisfies observation (e). However, Whittaker made no mention of the all-important experimental discovery of Trouton and Noble (3). Their experiment demonstrated that separated charges in a capacitor resulted in no tendency for the capacitor to turn when in linear motion transverse to its suspension. Put another way: (f) There is no interaction torque out of balance between anti-parallel current elements. This balance of torque action is not assured by the simple formulation of Whittaker in Eq. 3. To satisfy observation (f) terms other than those in I must cancel when & is equal to - &. This applies to the general formulation when A = B.

180

Journal

of The Franklin

Institute

Brief Communications
Dynamic Analysis

Consider now two particles of mass m and m. They are separated by the distance vector 7. The centre of inertia of this two-particle system is taken to be distant a and b respectively from m and m. Then, mb = ma. Let V, the velocity from a force Let V, the velocity (4)

of m, tend to change, decreasing by %. This must arise acting on m in the direction V. of m, tend to change, decreasing by I%. This must

-m(%/dt)

arise from a force -m(&/dt) acting on m in the direction V. These two forces on m and m will, in the general case, produce a turning moment in the system. Since there is no evidence that any system can begin to turn merely by its own internal interactions, the forces in the system must prevent an out-of-balance couple from asserting itself. Therefore, on m we add the force : -m-- iii b =-mdt a from Eq. 4. On m we add the force: _m-%a Z = -_m__. dt dt b a37 at

## The total force on m now becomes ,d; dt in V direction,

-m -mc -i?f

dt

in V direction,

in F direction,

where --F is the force we now assume to act directly on m as a result of its electrodynamic interaction with m. This force is a fully balanced interaction force. In summary, although we now have three force components, two have arisen by action and reaction and one is really fictitious. The prime direct electrodynamic force induces acceleration in a particle and therefore the inertial reaction. For generality, the inertial reaction force component which could correspond to a turning action has been introduced in the inertial formulation but since it must be zero it has been offset by a balancing term. Consider the rate of energy change at m, i.e.

We then remove the kinetic energy term and equate the remainder to zero.

2, February

1969

181

## Brief Communications Thus, (6) Similarly for m, d;

mdt=

0
-c-

F (F.21)21
r
-.

(w.v)

(7)

We can now evaluate the resultant force acting on each particle. For the particle of mass m, Eqs. 6 and 7 may be used to derive the general force expression p=

~-(q.i;.)v~(F.s)o~-(,.;)?). (w.v )r
units, Eq. 8

If we now assume the particles to be electrons, the masses m and m become equal and since the effective current elements e5, eZ may be written iz, i% where e denotes the electron charge in electromagnetic becomes,

(9)
A comparison of Eq. 9 with Eq. 2 shows it to be of the general form developed empirically by Whittaker. The comparison is satisfied if A is - 1 and B is - 1. Further, this satisfies observation (f), as expected from the basis of the analysis. We then develop the identity, F, =

kii(& .Z)
r2

and, from observation (e), with & = & realize that k is + 1. Of interest then is the fact that this force is exactly that deduced theoretically by evaluating the interaction component of the integrated magnetic field energy clue to the two current elements and assuming that it tends to increase. This result fully supports the belief that the isolated current element as a steady current element is contradictory. The inertial effects of the charge carriers are important to the understanding of the full law of electrodynamics. However, it has been shown that a unique law of electrodynamics can be formulated as

The odd thing about this is that the law thus deduced differs from that of AmpBre, Whittaker, Biot and Savart, and Grassmann. Further, we have deduced that this law is only valid for interactions between charge elements of equal mass. If the masses of charge carriers in different parts of the same circuit are different the middle term in the above formulation has a coefficient equal to the mass ratio.

182

## Journal of The Franklin

Institute

Brief Communications Since this middle term represents a force component along the direction of current flow, we may predict that in a discharge circuit where electrons carry current in a cathode but positive ions contribute to the current to the cathode there will be an electrodynamic force manifested along the discharge. Similarly, some manifestation of the predicted anomalous forces should appear in plasma work. Many authors have found anomalous cathode reaction forces in discharge studies. For example, Kobel (4) found an anomalous cathode reaction force of 250 dyn at 16 A and 1400 dyn at 35 A. This is of the order of 100i2, where i is the current in absolute units. This quadrature current phenomenon has defied explanation. Mere reaction momentum considerations lead to a relatively small cathode reaction force which is linearly dependent upon current. Even using Eq. 1, for example, any element of current in a continuous filament is subjected to balancing forces from the filament current on either side. There is no force action along the filament. This also applies to the classical formulations of the electrodynamic law. However, bearing in mind that in a discharge at least some of the current at the electrodes suddenly is transported by ions and not electrons, the mlm factor to be used with the middle term of Eq. 10 assumes importance. On one side of this current junction at the cathode electrons act upon ions in the discharge and on the other side ions act on ions. It works out that there is an out-of-balance force productive of a cathode reaction by impact from the ions. This force is the product of the constituent ion current component squared and the ratio of the ion mass to the electron mass. Forces of the order of lOOi as found by Kobel are therefore readily explained. It may be concluded that the resolution of this long-standing problem of the true nature of this basic electrodynamic law is not a mere academic topic. Some deeper understanding of the law will have practical consequences in discharge and plasma control.

References (1) R. A. R. Tricker, Early Electrodynamics, Oxford, New York, Pergamon Press, 1965. (2) Sir E. Whittaker, Aether and Electricity, London, Nelson, 1951. (3) F. T. Trouton and H. R. Noble, The Mechanical Forces Acting on a Charged Condenser Moving Through Space, Phil. Trans. R. Sot. London, Vol. 202A, pp. 165-181, 1903. (4) E. Kobel, Phys. Rev., Vol. 36, p. 1636, 1930.

183