Just a little correction to be done. The gradient of the electric field in a vacuum is equal to the charge density divided by the permittivity of the vacuum, as such: ∇•E = ρ/ε₀
-
-
-
This derivation deliberately assumes that the charge density is 0, because it's modelling the propagation of EM waves through a total vacuum, with no charges or currents present.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm here for the comments...
-
me too bruh .... n pretending that I know n understand this...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
...and God said let there be light!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
In the beginning god said "let the four dimensional divergences of an anti symmetric second rank tensor equals zero" and then there was light..
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Can someone please explain why there is 2 different delta signs and why in one them its deltaXe instead of delta.e ?pic.twitter.com/zuowgld9f7
-
#2 is the divergence, which roughly expresses how the field is changing in the direction that it points, or the spreading out. #3 is the curl, which expresses a rotational aspect or how the field changes perpendicular to how it points.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It’s been a long time for me and this is not where I work, but I believe equation 2, Gauss’ Law is not 0. Gauss’ Law for magnetic fields is 0 because no magnetic monopoles exist (you can’t have a North Pole without a South pole). But electric charges are independent.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.