You are on page 1of 13

The Faraday induction law in relativity theory

A L Kholmetskii
Department of Physics, Belarus State University,
4, F. Skorina Avenue, 220080 Minsk Belarus
O V Missevitch
Institute for Nuclear Problems, Belarus State University,
11, Bobruiskaya Str., 220050 Minsk, Belarus
We analyze the transformation properties of Faraday’s law in an empty space and its relationship with Maxwell’s equations. In our analysis we express the Faraday’s law via the fourpotential of electromagnetic field and the field of four-velocity, defined on a circuit under its
deforming motion. The obtained equations show one more facet of the physical meaning of
electromagnetic potentials, where the motional and transformer parts of the flux rule are incorporated into a common phenomenon, reflecting the dependence of four-potential on spatial
and time coordinates, correspondingly. It has been explicitly shown that for filamentary
closed deforming circuit the flux rule is Lorentz-invariant. At the same time, analyzing a
transformation of e.m.f., we revealed a controversy: due to causal requirements, the e.m.f.
should be the value of fixed sign, whereas the Lorentz invariance of flux rule admits the
cases, where the e.m.f. might change its sign for different inertial observers. Possible resolutions of this controversy are discussed.
PACS: 03.50.De

e. joining them into a single law (1)? And what is a relationship between both parts of induction under space-time transformations? 4. when a closed line of integration is fixed in space. Is there a common physical origin for “transformer” and “motional” parts of induction. Can we understand the known exceptions from the flux rule? In order to find the answers to the listed questions. Is the empirically discovered Faraday’s law d ε =− B ⋅ dS (1) dt S (t ) equivalent to Maxwell’s equation ∂B ∇× E = − . On a relationship between Maxwell equation ∇ × E = − ∂B ∂t and Faraday’s law It is known that the Faraday induction law was discovered experimentally in the first half of 19th century. we have to analyze separately transformation properties of this empirical law. and some ambiguities continue to exist up to now. ⋅ dS . and it suggested to Maxwell one of his equations. ε = − ∂t dt S ∂t S S Γ S ( ) . (2) over S and applying the Stokes theorem.f. respectively. Numerous papers and books were devoted to Faraday’s law. we suggest a new methodological approach. Now we ask a question: can we directly derive the Faraday’s law (1) from Maxwell’s equation (2)? The answer to this question is trivial. In particular. where Faraday’s law is expressed through the four-potential of electromagnetic field. (2) ∂t for the deforming contour Γ(t). its transformation properties were analyzed up to date only in a few papers (see. E ⋅ dl = − B ⋅dS . then the Faraday induction law (1) is necessarily Lorentz-invariant. If the answer to this question is positive. Γ (t ) and f is the force per unit charge. when the circuit moves) [1]. We believe that such an approach allows one to analyze the transformation properties of this law in more detail in comparison with the standard way. one can mention the questions as follows: 1. [2-6]). The case of time-variable contour Γ=Γ(t) happens to be especially difficult for such an analysis. refs. (3) ε = f ⋅ dl .. and Lorentz force law (“motional” part of induction. 2. In the case of negative answer. B are the electric and magnetic fields.g. However. Introduction It is known that Faraday’s law involves two different phenomena in a single equation: law of induction (“transformer” part of induction). 3. 2. we obtain d ∂B ∂B ∇ × E dS = − dS .2 1. Then both Γ and S do not depend on time. restricting the area S(t)? Here E . ε is the e. where the Faraday’s law operates with the electric and magnetic fields. composing the components of the electromagnetic tensor.m. and integrating Eq. which was written by Hertz in its modern form (2).

and v is the relative velocity between K and K’. when a circuit moves and simultaneously changes its shape. restricted by the contour Γ. t ' ) Γ' that yields (using ( ) where B. ) ⋅ dl '.f. E are the magnetic and electric fields. (5) in case of relativistic velocities v . The case.m.f. according to the rule for computing retarded e. [2] concluded that the flux rule loses its simple relation with the Maxwell equation (2).m. Eq. − B(r . t' ) ⋅ dl '. 4] emphasized incorrectness of Eq. ε’ in K’ exists. Even for rigidly moving circuit. because both integrals in Eq. (4) should be evaluated at different time moments for different points of circuit. when a well-defined e. which corresponds to different t '. dt 'S S ∂t ' S [ ( )] ∂B = −∇ × E and applying Stokes theorem to rhs): ∂t d E' + v × B'dl '= − B' ⋅dS '. Following the notation of ref. [3.3 which is Eq. The spatial r ' and time t 'coordinates refer to the frames K’. If a rigid contour Γ uniformly moves in space at the velocity v . ε '= E '(r '. (6) to indicate that an integral over Γ belongs to a special kind. γ '= 1 − v 2 c 2 . t ' (7) Γ' . (6) is not a simple problem in a general case. the authors of ref. and the authors of ref. Then the equality E = E' +v × B' (5) obviously disagrees with the relativistic transformation of an electric field. we have used a dotted circle on the right integral. such an interpretation is erroneous. Therefore. (see below).m. and the values of t 'are such that t is a fixed value along the trajectory. (1). is even more complicated. dσ is the element of the area of the surface S. and primed variables refer to the Lorentz frame K’. co-moving with an arbitrary point of the circuit at an arbitrary instant. in Eq. (5) is incorrect. t ) ⋅ ndσ = (6) c dt S (t ) γ ' ( r ' . For such a case Monsivais suggested to modify the Faraday’s law into the form [4] 1d E '(r ' . (4) dt 'S Γ Considering the latter expression. [4] invented a special symbol: dotted circle in Eq. (6) can be considered as the consequence of Maxwell equation (2) and relativistic transformation of electromagnetic field.f. [4]. This equation was first obtained by Gelman [3]. respectively. Eq. c is the light velocity in vacuum. However. 4] concluded that a direct calculation of e. However. [2] suggested interpreting the integrand of lhs as the electric field E in the rest frame of circuit K. Further contributions [3. the authors of ref. we can write [7] d ∂B ' B' ⋅dS '= ⋅ dS '− ∇ × v × B 'dS '. which denotes the fact that each its infinitesimal term is measured in different frames K’. The author of ref. dl is the element of the contour Γ. since the field E 'and B 'should be determined for the same fixed instant t of the rest frame of the circuit.

The lhs of this equation represents an e. when we express the Faraday law through the vector and scalar potentials of electromagnetic field. we take into account that the velocity vector field u is a function of r ∈ Γ .m. (10) are continuous. 1 E '(r ' . Here u (r . and it loses a simple relationship with the Maxwell equation (2).f. using their relationships with E and B : ∂A E=− − ∇ϕ . Here we assume that Eq. Monsivias mentions [4] that for the curve Γ(t) as a finite union of curves Γ(t ) = n i =1 Γi (t ) . Namely. t' ) ⋅ dl ' (8) ε= γ 'Γ ' is carried out at a fixed t and the one in Eq. Thus. B and u on space-time coordinates. t ) is the velocity of point r ∈ Γ(t) at the instant t. ∂ t dt Γ (t ) S ( ) ( ) (11) (12) For further transformation of Eq. Now let us express the Faraday law (10) via the scalar ϕ and vector A potentials of the electromagnetic field.4 we cannot simply put ε (t ) = ε ' (t ') γ . (10) and (11). too [4]). t ) can be introduced throughout the area S(t). dt Γ (t ) S (t ) ( ) (10) with clear indication of the dependence of E . (10) is written in the rest frame K of a measuring instrument (voltmeter). t ) ⋅ dS . according to its general definition (3) and the Lorentz force law. we get the following relationship: ∂A d − − ∇ ϕ + u × ∇ × A dl = − ∇ × A dS . B = ∇ × A . (9) where each Γi (t ) moves with constant velocity vi .m. (13) dt ∂t u × ∇ × A = ∇ A u ⋅ A − (u ⋅ ∇ )A . (In general. In our opinion. the velocity vector field u (r . ∂t Combining Eqs. (9). and following Feynman [1]. (7) at a fixed t '[4]. when it is expressed via the electric and magnetic fields. The rhs of Eq. because a calculation of e.. and e. The Faraday induction law expressed via the potentials of electromagnetic field As a starting point. (10) describes a time rate of the magnetic flux across the surface S capping the circuit Γ. for a deforming contour. we write the Faraday induction law in a well-known explicit form d E ( r .f. an actual further progress in the analysis of Faraday’s law can be achieved. [5] even suggests modifying Maxwell’s equations to make them compatible with the flux rule in a moving frame. the integral of the rhs of Eq.f. and both integrals are computed at the same time moment. t ) × B ( r . t ) dl = − B ( r . 2. (12) we use the vector identities dA ∂A = + (u ⋅ ∇ ) A . the Faraday’s law occurs very complicated. t ) + u ( r . We also assume that all functions in Eq. (14) where we should be careful in application of operator ∇ .1.m. The author of Ref. introduce a ( ) ( ) . can be calculated analytically for the particular forms of Eq. (6) becomes a sum of standard integrals.

we have to evaluate the total time derivative of the integral A ⋅ dl . dt Γ (t ) Γ (t ) dt ( ) A proof of this theorem is straightforward (see Appendix A). (18) represents a mathematical identity. dealing with computing an e. Combining Eqs. and magnetic fluxes. dt dt Γ (t ) Γ (t ) ( ) (17) For further transformation of rhs of Eq. (17). the latter law cannot be obtained from Eq. the flux rule should be inevitably Lorentz-invariant. Namely. It is related to physical interpre- . the authors of the cited above papers did not stress an essential feature of Faraday’s law transformation in comparison with many other relativistic problems. such a general covariant formulation of Faraday’s law makes difficult to apply it to analysis of many particular physical problems. as a circular integral of the total gradient. where the subscript denotes the quantity to be differentiated. Using this theorem. At the same time. (2) exclusively: its derivation for an arbitrary deforming contour requires involving the Lorentz force law and the ∂B solutions (11) of a couple of Maxwell’s equation ( ∇ × E = − . ∇ ⋅ B = 0 ) giving the rela∂t tionship between electric and magnetic fields. where the author suggested a new Lorentz-invariant generalized form for a magnetic flux.f.m. Γ (t ) as well as apply the Stokes theorem ∇ × A dS = A ⋅ dl S ( ) (16) Γ to rhs of Eq. Transformation properties of the Faraday induction law It is worth to mention at the beginning of this section that the Lorentz invariance of Faraday’s law (flux rule) has been already shown in a general form [6]. we transform Eq. (17) into dA dA − + ∇ A u ⋅ A dl = − − ∇ u u ⋅ A dl . we arrive at dA d − + ∇ A u ⋅ A dl = − A ⋅ dl . it seems important to show explicitly the invariance of Faraday’ law (18) for better understanding of its physics. and Γ Γ ( ) ( ) ( ) (u ⋅ A)dl = − ∇ (u ⋅ A)dl . because ∇ A u ⋅ A dl + ∇ u u ⋅ A dl = ∇ u ⋅ A dl = 0 . Γ ∇A Γ Γ u (19) Now we are able to establish a relationship between Maxwell’s equations and Faraday’s law in full. At the same time. 3. (12). In addition. Therefore.5 partial operator ∇ A in the latter identity (14). dt dt Γ (t ) Γ (t ) ( ) ( ) (18) We see that Eq. We also notice that the circular integral of a total gradient is equal to zero: (15) ∇ϕ ⋅dl = 0 . (12)-(16). One can show that Γ (t ) ( ) d dA A ⋅ dl = + A × (∇ × u ) + A ⋅ ∇ u dl . dt Γ (t ) Γ (t ) dt or in a compact form d dA A ⋅ dl = + ∇ u u ⋅ A dl .

m. In principle. uses this voltmeter in his measurements. determining ε (t ) . (23) ∂x i γ u We also take into account Eq. was named by Cullwick [9] as a rule for computing retarded (advanced) e. (20) that the time moments t’ are different for different r . This rule. Then. integrated into a circuit. any inertial observer. where all observers use the same measuring instrument. There is no physical meaning to integrate over the circuit at a fixed moment t’ of some arbitrary inertial frame K’ to find ε ' (t ') . where all inertial observers use in their measurements a single voltmeter.. Then only in the rest frame of voltmeter K a circular integration over Γ is carried out at the same instant t.m. if two inertial frames K and K’ are in relative motion. introducing the four-potential Aα ϕ . One sees from Eq. and r belongs to the closed circuit in the rest frame of voltmeter K. However.6 tation of the Lorentz transformations. which is applied to the rest frame of the voltmeter. (20) for t = const . regardless of his particular velocity with respect to the circuit. i=1. that each observer in his own rest frame uses his own measuring instrument to determine physical quantities in another frame. However. u α ∂Aα c∇ ⋅ ϕ − ∇ A u ⋅ A i = c . Obviously. an integration time t’ should be connected with t by means of the Lorentz transformation t '= γ t − v r c 2 . we arrive at u i α ∂Ai u α u α ∂Aα ∂Ai u α ∂ uα i − dx = + A dx i . because this value has no simple relation with an actual indication of voltmeter. we will analyze the transformation properties of the Faraday induction law. γ u = 1 1 − u 2 c 2 ). Here v stands for the velocity of voltmeter in the frame K’.3). suggested by Einstein in his fundamental paper [8]. and hence. where each observer uses his own voltmeter. (15). γ u u c} (α=0…3. one can demand that a moving observer operates with his own voltmeter. For this purpose we use the equalities dAi ∂A u α 0 = c αi (x =ct.f. such a voltmeter can be placed at an arbitrary point of a deforming circuit.f. and (22) γ u ∂x i [ ( )] [∇ (u ⋅ A)] = cA ∂ uα . A and the ( ) ( ) field of four-velocity u α {γ u . (21)-(23). Eq. (24) is proved by the equality (24) . as soon as we choose this point and its rest frame K. (21) dt ∂x γ u (see. combining Eqs. Namely. differs from the problem. In order to find such a relationship. It appears due to the above-mentioned fact: a measuring instrument (voltmeter) is common for all inertial observers. one can see that this is often not the case for the Faraday induction law: a measuring instrument for e. we have to generalize Eq. included into a circuit by means of sliding contacts. (18) into a four-dimensional form. (18). (13)). (voltmeter) usually represents an inherent part of the moving circuit. In order to explore the transformation properties of Faraday’s law. further integration over a circuit in any Lorentz frame K’ should be carried out under the requirement t=const in the frame K. the problem. v ) . Of course. where t '= t ' (r . Since the latter case has no practical significance. α α i α i γ γ γ γ ∂x u u u ∂x u Γ ∂x Γ ∂x Mathematical correctness of Eq.

Then we obtain γ' u ( ( )) 0 ∂ ∂G ∂G ∂x' ∂x j i 0 i i i i G x ' . Our conclusion coincides with the results of refs. Hence we can designate α ∂ A' ∂ i i 0 i α u' dx ' = G x' . continuing consideration of the Faraday’s law transformation.2 3. Further.7 u α ∂Aα ∂ uα ∂ Aα u α i i (25) + A dx = dx = 0 . (28) and (29) the rule for computing of a retarded e. That is why we may consider Eq. α i i γu ∂x i γ u Γ γ u ∂x Γ ∂x as far as the integral is computed for fixed t in the rest frame of the voltmeter. and transformation of e. This proves the validity of Eq. (20). α i 0 should be applied. Then ∂ uα i u α ∂Aα i = − dx A dx . provides the equality (24). and hence. the lhs of Eq.m. we can present the e. This means that the four-vectors depend not on x' . (18). x ' x dx ' = dx ' + dx' = dG =0. (28). we have. (24) have the same form for primed functions. (25)). the validity of Eq.m. itself. defined in an arbitrary inertial frame K’.f. These problems are consequently analyzed in sub-sections 3. in turn.1. (24) can be used to explore transformation properties of the Faraday induction law (flux rule). (3).m. i i 0 j i ∂x' ∂x ∂x' Γ '∂x' Γ ' ∂x ' Γ' as a circular integral of a full differential. the flux rule is implemented for any inertial observer. α γ u ∂x i Γ ∂x γ u Γ γu where Fαβ u β is the four-dimensional Lorentz force per unit charge [10]. ' ' dx A dx' = + − α i α i α γ' ∂x' γ ' u u ∂x ' u u Γ ' ∂x ' γ ' Γ ' ∂x ' γ ' (28) which is possible. to distinguish two separate problems: implementation of the flux rule for different observers. Hence. (24) we did not make any special assumptions about the behavior of the closed circuit Γ in the rest frame of the voltmeter K. x' x i dx' . Thus. (24) describes an e. [3. but on x' .f.m. Using a tensor of the electro∂Aβ ∂A magnetic field Fαβ = α − αβ . Then the Lorentz invariance of flux-rule would mean the equality α α α α ∂A' ∂A' ∂A' u' ∂ u' i i i u' i u' α . in form ∂x ∂x α α ∂Ai u Fiα u α i u ∂Aα i (27) ε= − dx = − dx .f. 6]. i i γ ' ∂ x ' ∂ x ' u Γ' Γ' ( ( ( )) ( )) α A' α u' where G = . 4.1 and 3.f. (29). Note that under derivation of Eq. Flux rule for different observers Eq. both integrands in lhs and rhs of Eq. (26) α i ∂x i γ u Γ γ u ∂x Γ which. x' x i in accordance with Eq. although our proof of the Lorentz-invariance of flux rule ex- .f. (27) as a generalization of definition of e.m. if α ∂ A' i α u' dx' =0 (29) i γ ' ∂ x ' u Γ' (compare with Eq. In Eqs. in general. As in Eq.

and vise versa. (9). in combination with the rule for computing a retarded (advanced) e. Thus. (10). the Lorentzinvariance of this law. is framedependent. or electromagnetic potentials. although it clearly indicates.f.f. Even so. that it should be equal to zero in any other frame. Then the identities of vector analysis. In contrast to filamentary closed lines. It is important that in such calculations we deal with only two Lorentz frames: the rest frame of voltmeter K and external observer K’. and the flux rule is fulfilled (see [11] and references therein).f.. For this purpose we have to transform the velocity vector field u . Transformation of an e. is equal to zero in one frame of observation. in one frame can be purely transformer. Nevertheless. too. Then it is Lorentz invariant according to our analysis. Analyzing the transformation of an e.f. both parts of Faraday’s law have a common physical origin: variation of the vector potential as the function of space-time four-vector. (13). which include extended conductors (e. for such distributed circuits one can choose a filamentary closed line. containing a velocity parameter (for example. in general.m. where the points of discontinuity of a velocity vector field are avoided.f. We would like to point out that our analysis was carried out for the geometrical closed lines or filamentary closed circuits. The obtained equations allow revealing a physical meaning of the transformer and motional parts of Faraday’s law in terms of four-potential of electromagnetic field: namely.m. one should recognize that for an arbitrarily moving deformed circuit any available approach (including a parametrical integration of Ref. or introducing a new physical quantity such as 4-flux [6]. incorrect. In addition. [6]) does not allow analytic derivation of the law of transformation of e. when we express this law through the electric and magnetic fields. Eqs. lhs of Eqs.m. and in the limiting particular cases the e. and then to apply either a transformation of electromagnetic fields. In practice we can deal with the closed circuits. in accordance with the chosen form of Faraday’s law. while the motional part is determined by the change of A with r . under space-time transformations a partial time derivative of vector field A can be transformed into its partial spatial derivative. Hence.f. .. Eq. although a special integration procedure of Eq..g. we are free to take an e.m. In these conditions the causal requirements give a key to predicting a form of e. 3. the transformer part is determined by the change of A with t. an unipolar inductor). Now we can say that both parts of Faraday’s law have a common physical origin: variation of A as the function of space-time four-vector. such a circuit can contain the points of discontinuity of a velocity vector field (e. we have to determine an integration time in accordance with Eq. Of course. for the rest frame of the voltmeter in any available form (see.g. while in another frame it can be purely motional.m. A notation of Faraday’s law in forms (18) and (24) seems to be novel. (24) is not significant for practical applications of Faraday’s law. itself.f.8 pressed via four-potential is the simplest among those presented to date and does not require a knowledge of the explicit form of magnetic flux transformation law. (14)) become. (5) can be also applied. At the same time. Indeed: .f. A visible distinction between two parts of Faraday’s law appears at the level.m. in the sliding contacts on the boundary of moving extended conductors). we have to remember about a common origin of these phenomena. a relative contribution of the motional and transformer parts of Faraday’s law into the resultant e.m. transformation. and the flux rule can be violated. Einstein specially emphasized this circumstance in his famous work [8].if an e. (25)) and then compute its value in any other Lorentz frame. Perhaps.2.f.m.m. (18) and Eq.

[9]).m. Then the e. (33). if in an inertial frame K dS ε = −B ⋅ > 0. ε’ is the e. E 2 − c2B2 > 0 . Then the requirement (32) signifies the existence of such a Lorenz frame. (31) At the same time. that it should be positive (negative) in any other frame.m. Hence according to Eqs.m. It appears in the problems.f. In other words.f.f.f. in an external Lorentz frame K’. For any inertial frames K and K’. where the internal electric field Ein =0. (30). (1)) d dS ε =− . it happens when the field invariants satisfy the requirements E ⋅ B = 0 . can change its sign for different observers. common for all inertial observers: a resistor with a high resistance R. (32). (34) dt ' due to the Lorentz invariance of flux rule and different signs of B and B '.for v=0 (observer be at rest with respect to voltmeter). contradict each other. (33). Hence. Eq.9 - if an e. Analyzing the revealed controversy. Ref. at the lowest order in 1 c as follows: ( ) ε '= ε ⋅ F v 2 c 2 . and I=I’/γ (see. all obtained as unambiguous consequences of classical electrodynamics. wherein the magnetic field B is identically equal to zero in a vicinity of Γ. there is a serious contradiction between Eqs. and v is the relative velocity of K and K’. determine a form of transformation of e. (31) and Eqs.m. constituting the components of the tensor of EM field. In particular. moving at a relative velocity v . One can see that these three requirements. we assume the constant magnetic field within a closed circuit Γ (the case of Eqs. is equal to ε = RI . Physically it means that a conductor is po- . Thus. with F (0) = 1 . the magnetic field B . if we assume the simplest construction of a voltmeter. Then the Faraday’s law acquires the form (see.m. (32). . so that its spatial and time partial derivatives are negligible. measuring a current through R. R’=R.f. where the magnetic field B is constant or very slowly changes with time and distance. where he derived F v 2 c 2 = γ [9].m. (33) dt then we can find another inertial frame K’.f. (32) Then the whole product B ⋅ dS dt is an alternating quantity for different inertial observers. where dS ' ε '= − B' ⋅ < 0. The same form of function F can be obtained for any moving deforming circuit. (31) and the proven above the Lorentz invariance of flux rule. and only the electric field E exists. (33) an e. (34)). (30) where ε is the e. Cullwick considered a number of simple problems. connected in series with galvanometer. However. This field does not penetrate into a bulk of conducting circuit. ε = ε '. Eq. represents an alternating quantity. ε '= I 'R'= γIR = γε . taken together. the time derivative dS dt is the value of fixed sign in all inertial reference frames. in a rest frame of voltmeter K. is positive (negative) in one inertial frame. B ⋅ dS = − B ⋅ dt S (t ) dt ( ) Certainly.

(30). and this puzzling requires to be carefully analyzed. Insofar the magnetic field is equal to zero in this frame of observation. ∇⋅ B = 0. in the circuit is equal to zero. where its internal electric field is always vanished. Due to linearity of the electromagnetic field transformation. It can be demonstrated by the problem in Fig. Thus. and all of them are answered below: 1. 4. (34) signifies a presence of one more exception from the flux rule. we get E' (36) in . In fact. in the circuit. and dΦ dS dR (t ) uvE = B z = 2πR (t ) B z ≈ 2πR (t ) 2 (37) dt dt dt c to the accuracy c-2. while the e. B ' in = 0 in any other Lorentz frame of observation. which was not reported up to date. (36) holds true. (35) everywhere inside the conductor. we obtain the equality Ein . Bin = 0 . In the rest frame of condenser. We emphasize that the revealed exception from the flux rule happens for a filamentary circuit. the electric and magnetic fields contain the points of discontinuity on a charged surface of conductor. we observe that the time derivative of the magnetic flux across the circuit in Fig. wherein the condenser and circumference move at the constant velocity u along the axis x. .f. (30). Conclusions In the introduction to this paper we formulated a number of questions. is equal to zero in all frames of observation in accordance with Eqs. expressed through a fourpotential of electromagnetic field. (31) and Eqs. (30). and the flux rule is no longer valid. the magnetic flux Φ across the area of expanded circumference S and its total time derivative dΦ/dt are not vanished in the frame K. 2 c 1− u2 c2 between the plates of condenser. (35) for the internal electric and magnetic field of the conductor. Indeed. (33). ∂t 2. it is not. (31). Since in this frame Eq. At the same time. Is the empirically discovered Faraday’s law (1) equivalent to Maxwell’s equation (2) for the deforming contour Γ(t). These points of discontinuity define a principal difference between real conducting filamentary circuits and closed geometrical lines in space. An expanding conducting circumference with the radius R(t)=R(0)+vt is placed inside the parallel plate condenser. when the velocity field is a continuous function.m.f.f.m. 1. (33). only the constant electric field E exists along the axis y. For geometrical lines the controversy between Eqs. 1 is not vanished. At the same time. the revealed incompatibility of Eq. and we get Eq.10 larized in such a way. Hence the e. (31) and Eqs. then there is no e. restricting the area S(t)? In general. In order to derive Faraday’s law we have to involve the Lor∂B entz force law and a couple of Maxwell’s equations ∇ × E = − . Now let us introduce an inertial frame K. Is the flux rule Lorentz-invariant? We explicitly showed the invariance of flux rule. in this frame uE Bz = . (34) persists.m.

contradict the Lorentz invariance of flux rule. Proof: Let us write the integral A ⋅ dl . finding the answers on the foregoing questions. where an e.m. transformations (30) and (31). ∆yi = yi − y i −1 . and do not depend on the properties of electromagnetic fields and four-potentials. Therefore. and it removes the contradiction between Eqs.11 3. (30). 4. In contrast to the known up to date exceptions. t )∆z i = n→∞ dt i =1 dt Γ (t ) ( {designating Ax (ri . and ri is the coordinate of any point on the elemental line i. is the frame-dependent quantity. (31) and Eqs. A y (ri . t )∆y i + Az (ri . Can we understand the known exceptions from the flux rule? The known exceptions from the flux rule are related with the properties of the closed circuits (filamentary lines or extended conductors). might be an alternating quantity (Eqs. (30). However.m. (34) persists. Appendix A In this appendix we prove a theorem as follows: . (31) and Eqs. representing new serious difficulty of classical electrodynamics: the e. being in conformity with causal requirements. We have shown that for real conducting circuits this controversy is reduced to one more exception from the flux rule. Under space-time transformations a partial time derivative of vector field A can be transformed into its partial spatial derivative. t ) = Azi } ) . t ) and any smooth closed line Γ(t ) . (33). both forms of Faraday law (expressions through the fields and through potentials) are relevant for analysis of these exceptions. And what is a relationship between both parts of induction under space-time transformations? Expressing the Faraday law through the four-potential. the new exception takes place for filamentary conducting closed circuits. t )dz ) = nlim (Ax (ri .f. while the motional part is determined by the change of A with r . t )∆zi ). t )∆yi + Az (ri . t )dy + Az (r . and this puzzling requires to be carefully analyzed.f. joining them into a single law (1). a relative contribution of the motional and transformer parts of Faraday’s law into the resultant e. we found that the transformer part of Faraday’s is determined by the change of A with t. t )∆xi + Ay (ri .for any smooth vector field A(r . At the same time. we faced the challenge. and vise versa. t ) is the velocity of the point r within the line Γ. (34). (33). t ) = Axi . Hence. t )∆xi + Ay (ri . Is there a common physical origin for “transformer” and “motional” parts of induction. dt Γ (t ) dt Γ (t ) (A1) where u = u (r .m. t )dx + Ay (r . for closed geometrical lines in space the controversy between Eqs. (33). Therefore. ( ) d dA A ⋅ dl = + A × (∇ × u ) + A ⋅ ∇ u dl . ∆z i = z i − z i −1 are the components of elemental lines on the corresponding coordinate axes. proceeding from its definition: Γ (t ) A ⋅ dl = Γ (t ) (Ax (r . Then d d n A ⋅ dl = lim Ax (ri . Az (ri . →∞ n i =1 Γ (t ) where ∆xi = xi − xi −1 . t ) = A yi . both parts of Faraday’s law can be incorporated into a common physical phenomenon: variation of A as the function of space-time four-vector.f. (34)). happened for extended conductors.

Monsivais G 2004 Am. Franklin 6. (A3) Substituting its value into Eq. 72 1178 5. 2nd edn (New York: Pergamon Press) 11. (A2) one gets Eq. Green and Co) 10. Phys. J. n→∞ i =1 Γ ( t ) dt Further. Cullwick E A 1957 Electromagnetism and Relativity (London-New York-Toronto: Longmans. Phys. J. ∆u yi = ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂u ∂u ∂u ∆u zi = z ∆xi + z ∆yi + z ∆z i . Mass: AddisonWesley) 2. taking into account that for any fixed time moment the velocities vi are considered as the smooth functions of ri within the closed line Γ(t ) . Dunning-Davies J arxiv. Mass. References 1. Marx E 1975 J. It can be expressed via the conventional operator ∇ as ( ) ( ) ∇ u u ⋅ A = A × (∇ × u ) + A ⋅ ∇ u . J. t ) ⋅ dl + lim Axi ∆u xi + Ayi ∆u yi + Azi ∆u zi . Panofsky W K H and Phillips M 1962 Classical Electricity and Magnetism 2nd edn (Reading. 17 891 9. we can write ∂u y ∂u y ∂u y ∂u ∂u ∂u ∆xi + ∆yi + ∆z i . Phys. Ares-de-Parga G and Rosales M A 1989 Eur. Phys. 10 74 3. ∆u xi = x ∆xi + x ∆y i + x ∆z i . J. t ) ⋅ dl + Ax ∂u x + Ay y + Az ∂u z dx + Ax ∂u x + Ay y + Az ∂u z dy + ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y dt ∂x ∂y Γ (t ) Γ (t ) + Γ (t ) ∂u y ∂u ∂u dA (r . ∂x ∂y ∂z From there we obtain ∂u ∂u ∂u d dA (r . Phys. which proves the theorem. 72 1478 . 12 230 4. Feynman R P 1964 The Feynman Lectures on Physics vol II (Reading.12 = lim n n→∞ i =1 = lim n n→∞ i =1 = dAyi dAxi dA dxi dxi −1 dyi dyi −1 dz i dz i −1 ∆xi + ∆yi + zi ∆z i + Axi − + A yi − + Azi − dt dt dt dt dt dt dt dt dt dAyi dAxi dA ∆xi + ∆yi + zi ∆z i + Ax (u xi − u xi −1 ) + A yi u yi − u yi −1 + Azi u zi − u yz −1 dt dt dt ( ( ) ( ) = = ) n dA (r . 300 353 7. Munley F 2004 Am. (A1).: Addison-Wesley) 8. Gelman H 1991 Eur. t ) ⋅ dl + ∇ u u ⋅ A dl Ax x + Ay + Az z dz = ∂z ∂z ∂z dt Γ(t ) Γ (t ) ( ) (A2) where the operator ∇ u acts only on u . Landau L D and Lifshitz E M 1962 The Classical Theory of Fields. Einstein A 1905 Ann. t ) ⋅ dl + Ax ∂u x dx + ∂u x dy + ∂u x dz + Ay y dx + y dy + y dz + A ⋅ dl = ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z dt Γ (t ) Γ ( t ) dt Γ (t ) Γ (t ) + Γ (t ) = Az ∂u z ∂u ∂u dx + z dy + z dz = ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂u ∂u dA (r .

Expanded circumference inside the parallel plate charged condenser .13 . 1. Condenser _ v E v v y v + x u Fig.