No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Concept of ‘Field’ in Electrical Theory
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2022
Extract
In this paper we shall consider the circumstances under which the concept of ‘field’ was introduced into electrical theory, the traditional use of the notion of field with particular reference to electrical theory, and sketch three characters of a field in this context. These are its pervasiveness, its independent existence, and its status as an elastic body. In each case we will briefly bring to bear more modern comment on these three facets of the traditional conception, attempting to salvage the meaning for the term field that is currently accepted. Following this, ‘field intensity’ will be compared with other terms such as ‘displacement current’ and the fictional character of terms and the conventional character of the equations in which ‘field intensity’ appears will be discussed. The paper closes with a summary of the points made.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association 1946
Footnotes
An obituary follows this article, which is being published posthumously.
References
Notes
1 Thomson, W. 1842
2 Maxwell, J. C. Scientific Papers. Vol. I
3 That is, perpendicular to the element of surface.
4 Poisson. 1812
5 Green, George. “Essay on the Application of Mathematical Analysis to Theories Electricity and Magnetism“, 1828
6 Maxwell. Treatise. I:47
7 Abraham and Becker. The Classical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism. p. 53
8 It is observed that the pith ball moves in different directions and different distances when in the presence of the electrified body. Since there is motion it is assumed that there must be a force of some sort operating.
9 Ibid. p. 53–4
10 An alternative procedure for the definition of E was suggested by Prof. Black. Consider these statements:
At a place P in the space surrounding a body B, test body b1 moves in direction d1
At a place P in the space surrounding a body B, test body b2 moves in direction d2
At a place P in the space surrounding a body B, test body bi moves in direction di
Suppose that as the charges on the bodies (bi) decrease monotonically the directions move monotonically. And that if ei is the charge on bi and θ the angle between di and a certain direction d, we can establish empirically a relation θ = f(ei) such that .
We may then define d as the direction of the field at P. Obviously we cannot perform the passage to the limit empirically. The definition extrapolates beyond experimental verification.
11 Abraham and Becker. op. cit. p. 55
12 Maxwell. op. cit. I:48
13 Ibid. p. 75
14 Abraham and Becker. op. cit. p. 55
15 Here p is the charge density and pv the current density, v being the velocity of electric charges considered as discrete particles.
16 Lindsay and Margenau. Foundations of Physics, p. 311–312
17 In electrostatics, for example, there is the problem of determining the capacity of a charged metal sphere of radius a. Let us see how Lindsay and Margenau's suggestion operates here. We infer from the symmetry that the distribution of charge is uniform so that the surface density of charge is e/4πa2. Let equations , (φ the potential) define a certain vector E whose normal component has the above properties and which we assume is so specified as to be unique by adding sufficient conditions. Then and φ = e/r + k. On the sphere it has the constant value φ = e/a + k.
Consider a concentric sphere radius b > a with a surface density ω = – e/4πb2 and potential at its surface φ b = e/b + k.
A relationship independent of the size of the charge may be found by forming the quotient of the charge to the difference ; we get which is called the capacity of the spherical condenser.
18 I have transposed some paragraphs in this quotation. II:432
19 Maxwell.
20 Where ‘x’ is the distance measured in the direction of the wave, ‘v’ is velocity, and ‘t’ the time.
21 Lindsay and Margenau
22 O'Rahilly, Alfred. Electromagnetics. chapter on the aether. p. 630 circa
23 Maxwell. Treatise. II:433
24 Ibid. II:252
25 Ibid. II:435
26 See p. 11
27 This discussion follows Mason and Weaver. The Electromagnetic Field. Ch. III, part 1, and Ch. IV.
28 Not clear, but left as author stated it.