Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
A surface does not have to be closed to define a flux.
The same comment can be made for the message you
posted 5 minutes later.
Leigh Palmer wrote:
Responding to this:
Quantization would imply a finite number of field lines.
How many electric lines does an electron produce?
Leigh wrote:
Unlike magnetism, where a line is a measurement of flux, no
such unit exists for electric field. ...
The surface integral of E, appearing in Gauss's law, is the
flux. For example, the total flux into 4*Pi, or into a smaller
solid angle. What makes it conceptually different from the
surface integral of B?
I don't know what you mean by conceptually different, but the
latter is always zero. That would seem to be a significant
difference.
Leigh
I know that magnetic lines are always closed loops while
electric lines begin and end on charges. But why should
this be significant here?