0
$\begingroup$

My question is, that given a vector field only numerically discrete in space, is there a way to estimate its vector potential?

Theoretically, I see this which requires the vector field over all of $\mathbb{R}^3$. Further, I also see Will Jagy's answer using Poincare's lemma which I like much more. But in this case I still need to know the entire vector field from $(0,0,0)$ to the point $(x,y,z)$ where I want to estimate the vector potential because of $t\in(0,1)$. Better than $\mathbb{R}^3$ but still requiring too much information.

Is there any way to use only some local information from a vector field and estimate the local vector potential? I don't need to know the entire vector potential and I don't have the entire vector field anyway. It seems to me it should be possible because from what I understand, the curl is defined as a limit and seems to be a local property. So can I reverse it locally? Any insight or references would be appreciated.

Just to clarify, I only have discrete (in space) numerical measurements of the vector field in a very small finite corner of $\mathbb{R}^3$ away from the origin. And I am hoping to use them to estimate the local vector potential numerically in the same corner.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ My first guess: numerically approximate the integral in the Poincare lemma, using sums in place of integrals, since the integral is a limit of sums. $\endgroup$
    – Ben McKay
    Jan 15, 2014 at 9:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is not really a research level question. $\endgroup$
    – Ben McKay
    Jan 15, 2014 at 9:00
  • $\begingroup$ @BenMcKay A matter of opinion surely. This question really did come up in my current original research and I can't seem to find anything where this problem has been discussed before. If you know of any, please let me know. $\endgroup$ Jan 15, 2014 at 9:43
  • $\begingroup$ @BenMcKay Sorry for the confusion. The question isn't about how to compute a (1D Riemann) integral. Those are easy. The question is rather how to "invert" the curl operator, and even that, locally. The question is, what is the integral that I should be evaluating, i.e. I don't have field values from $[0,5100]$. I only have values in $[5000,5100]$. Is there another formulation of the curl inverse which requires only local values? $\endgroup$ Jan 15, 2014 at 10:02

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Let's put the origin in your corner of ${\mathbb R}^3$, and say you have measurements of the field $\vec{F}$ at lattice points $\epsilon [i,j,k]$ for integers $0 \le i \le m$, $0 \le j \le n$, $0 \le k \le p$. One version of the vector potential at $(x,y,z)$ is $$ {\vec V}(x,y,z) = \left[ \int_0^z F_2(x,y,t)\ dt, \int_0^x F_3(s,y,0)\ ds - \int_0^z F_1(x,y,t)\ dt, 0\right]$$ The integrals (when $x,y,z$ are lattice points) can then be approximated by sums over lattice points by the usual numerical methods.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Robert, but the field is a physical (magnetic) field so I can't move the origin. The origin is fixed in physical space and suppose my measurements are at some lattice in let's say $(x,y,z)\in[5000,5100]^3$. I don't have any measurements in $[0,5000]^3$. Any way for me to estimate the vector potential in a subset of $[5000,5100]^3$? If I have the necessary info needed for an integral then of course numerical integrating won't be a problem. $\endgroup$ Jan 15, 2014 at 9:51
  • $\begingroup$ @FixedPoint You can surely relabel your coordinates so that $(x,y,z)\in[0,100]^3$. Alternatively, just integrate starting from $(5000,5000,5000)$ instead of $(0,0,0)$. $\endgroup$
    – j.c.
    Jan 15, 2014 at 10:48
  • $\begingroup$ Aha, the translation invariance of the curl. Perfect, exactly what I was looking for. Thanks everyone. $\endgroup$ Jan 18, 2014 at 1:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.