IL NUOVO C]MENTO

VOL. 76B, N. 2

11 Agosto 1983

The Original Ampere Force and Biot-Savart

and Lorentz Forces.
I).T. I'AI,PAS

Department o/ Physics, Dicision, o/ Meelmuics

University o/ Athens - Panepistimiopolis, Athens 621
(ricevuto il 15 Novembre 1982; manoscritto revisionato ricevuto il 30 Marzo 1983)

S u m m a r y . - - The purpose of this paper is to present the results of a very

simple c
which favours the original Amp6re force and unambiguously disproves the Biot-Savart force of relativity, or its approximation in
a covariant relativistic form, namely the Lorentz force. This experiment
with its extra degree of h'eedom has the advantage ow'~r the m a n y other
similar ones, including Amp6re's original experiment, which have been
performed in the past and recently by Graneau, of giving results which
are both qualitative and quantitative, as well as unambiguous. Due to the
strong association of the Biot-Savart and Lorentz force to relativistic
theories, the experiment can also be considered as limiting the generality of
these theories.
])ACS. 41.10. -- Classical clectronmgnetism.

T h e law for c u r r e n t i n i e r a c t i o n , w h i c h is p o p u l a r l y k n o w n a n d a h n o s t
e x c l u s i v e l y m e n t i o n e d i n all t e x t b o o k s on e l e c t r o m a g n e t i s n b for exa.mple
ref. (1) (p. 172), is

dFo_l = ]- 12 ds2 dB1

(1)

with

(2)
(1)

dB1 - .

11 dst r

cra

J. D. ,]'.4.CKSON: Classical Electrodylmmies (New York, N . Y . , 1975).

189

190

P.z.

eAPPAS

I n t h e case of a simple charge q, since I ds N qv, eq. (1) becomes

(3)

F :

1_ qv

or, b y including the electrostatic interaction in t h e presence of an electric field E,

(4)

F - : q ( E -~ l v

F o r m u l a (2) together with formula (1) is called either Amp~re's law, Laplace's
law, Biot's law or Biot-Savart's law. On the other hand, formule (3) and (4),
are k n o w n as the L o r e n t z force.
As a m a t t e r of historical accuracy, the force law which results from eqs. (1)
and (2) is not due at all to A_~e~I~v,.
I n d e e d , A~[P~E had strongly criticized (ref. (2), p. 321; ref. (a), p. 24) Biot
and Savaxt, and it appears t h a t eqs. (1) and (2) are due to BIoT a n d SAVA]~T
after a suggestion of Laplace (ref. (3); ref. (4), p. 288).
T h e actual formula which A Z ~ E (5) s u b m i t t e d to the F r e n c h a c a d e m y
of science, initially in t h e y e a r 1820, including u n d e t e r m i n e d constants, and
in its final form in t h e y e a r 1823, is (*)

(5)

dF21 : - - r ~ -

2 dsl" ds~ - -

(dsl" r)(ds~, r) .

T h e most characteristic p r o p e r t y of eq. (5) is t h a t it is symmetric with

respect to dsl and ds2, which suggests t h a t
(6)

dF21-- = dF~2.

This is a p r o p e r t y which is not shared b y t h e Biot-Savart and Lorentz force

laws (1) and (4). This means t h a t these laws, c o n t r a r y to Amp~re's original
law, violate Newton's t h i r d law of action and reaction.
Nevertheless, this did not seem to cause serious troubles in the last century,
since it was suggested (particularly b y )SAXW~L (2)) t h a t all circuits were equi(2) J. C. MAXWELL: Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism (Oxford, 1891 and
New York, N.Y., 1954).
(8) R . A . R .
TRrCKER: Early Electrodynamics (London, 1965).
(4) W . T . SCOTT: The Physics of Electricity and Magnetism (New York, ST. Y., 1966).
(5) A. M. AMP2~E: Memoires de l'Aeademie l~oyale des Sciences (Paris, 1823), issued
in 1827.
(*) I l, I 2 are expressed in electromagnetic units. For other units, the r.h.s, of eq. (5)
should be multiplied by K = 10-1 =/~o/4Z for M.K.S.A. units or by K = 1/e2 for
Gaussian units, like eqs. (1)-(4).

T H E ORIGIIqA_L A M P E R E F O R C E AND T H E BIOT-SAVART AND L O R E N T Z FORCES

191

valent to closed circuits, if one takes into account the displacement currents,
which in reality exist b y the polarization of the dielectrics or the polarization
of the ether. F u r t h e r , for closed circuits, it was known to Ampere and t h e n
to Maxwell t h a t , when Amp~re's equation (5) is integrated along a closed circuit $1, t h e n this integrated interaction on a n y elements ds~ gives an identical
result as t h e force law (1) of Blot and Savart, integrated along the same circuit. Thus w h a t Maxwell suggested was t h a t the two laws--Amp~re's and
B i o t - S a v a r t ' s - - w e r e indistinguishable.
MAXWELL, in m y view, went wrong in two r e s p e c t s - - o n e purely matheme~tical and one purely physical. I shall refer to these in the following.
1) The claim for the i d e n t i t y of the two laws, which MAXWELL does
not prove b u t refers to as manifestly known, makes sense only when ds~ is
not p a r t of t h e second circuit sz, so t h a t the distance r of ds~ from a n y ds2 is
always different from zero. W h e n ds~ is p a r t of the closed circuit s2, the proof
no longer holds. (See the proofs in (a,6,7).) I t is possible, therefore, to distinguish the two laws between two parts of the same circuit. Actually, one
of the original experiments of Ampere, which is referred to b y MAXWE~ (ref. (~)~
p. 319) and GRA~EA~ (3), and to which I shall refer later on, is based on this
very fact.
2). The displacement currents were introduced b y MAXWELL on arguments
based on the equation of continuity and conservation of charge. Thus it is' correct to consider an open circuit closed if completed b y displacement currents,
produced in dielectrics or in the ether. Such displacement currents evidently
make sense in the ease of interactions, as t h e y can e x e r t or receive a force.
The problem arises because relativity t h e o r y abolished the reality of ether,
and consequently t h e displacement currents became virtual. F r o m the physical point of view, this is equivalent to the assertion t h a t ~ v a c u u m exerts
or receives forces, which makes no sense, unless it is speculated t h a t in this
particular case t h e electromagnetic field can exert or receive forces, via electromagnetic-wave emission (ref. (3), p. :124). This, however, is only a wishful
speculation whose purpose is to justify the above impossible assertion. Although
this speculation has been suggested b y m a n y other authors, such as ALo~so
and FINN (ref. (~o), p. 541), KELLER (11), PAGE and A D ~ S (~2), it has never
been p r o v e d rigorously or completely.
(6) R. C. LYNESS: Gontemp. Phys., 3, 453 (1961-1962).
(7) P. WESLEY: private communication (1982).
(s) P. GRANEAU: Nature (London), 295, 311 (1982).
(9) W. K. H. PAI~OFSKY and M. P~ILLIPS: Classi/ical Electricity and Magnetism
(Reading, Mass., 1975).
(10) M. ALONSO and E. J. FINN : Fundamental University Physics, Vol. 2 (Reading, Mass.
1978).
(11) j . M. KELLE~: Am. J. Phys., 10, 302 (1942).
(13) L. PAGE and N. I. ADAMS: Am. J. Phys., 13, 141 (1945).

192

F.T.

PAePAS

Thus it is w o r t h y to t e s t experimentally the laws of Ampere and Biot-Savart.

The first experiment of this sort was carried out b y A ~ P ~ E (ref. (2), p. 319,
and ref. (13)). The e x p e r i m e n t consisted of two troughs of mercury, connected
with each other b y a floating bridge of copper wire, as shown in fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

W h e n current is supplied at A and G, it eventually goes t h r o u g h B C D E F

(for t h e resistivity of copper is less t h a n t h a t of mercury) and the bridge is
always seen to move forward.
The explanation given b y AMPI~I~E WaS t h a t t h e current repels itself along
its straight path, as is indicated b y formula (5). T h a t is, the p a t h A B repels
t h e p a t h B C and the p a t h G~~ repels the p a t h / ~ E . The exact repulsion depends
on t h e current distribution in the mercury troughs, which cannot be easily
k n o w n beforehand.
The explanation given b y MAXWELL (ref. (2), p. 319), based on the Biot-Snvart
law, is t h a t , on section CDE, a forward force is applied, due to the currents
A B C a n d G E E . As a m u t t e r of fact, the reaction of the Biot-Savart force is
not k n o w n and it can only be speculated t h a t it goes into the field, which, during the forward acceleration of the bridge, emits electromagnetic radiation in the
opposite direction and in such a way t h a t the t o t a l m o m e n t u m of the system
(( bridge plus field ~) is conserved.
The existence of this speculated radiation could be an i n d e p e n d e n t test
for t h e two laws. However, as we shall see f r o m our experiment, the radiated
e n e r g y resulting from t h e above considerations should well exceed t h e total
dissipated electrical e n e r g y of the circuit!
T h e e x p e r i m e n t which I performed in the years :[980-82 was designed with
no prior knowledge of AmpUtees experiment, or of a n y other relevant experim e n t , such as those p e r f o r m e d b y several other researchers in the p a s t (~1-~7).
The experiment was designed to test the c u r r e n t interactions of special
r e l a t i v i t y (which, actually, are a p p r o x i m a t e d b y t h e Biot-Savart law) as con-

(13) A. ~ . AMe}RE: Memoires sur l'Electrodynamique, Vol. 1 (Paris, 1882), p. 25.

(11) C. HERING: Trans. Am. Inst. El. Eng., 42, 311 (1923).
(15) F. ~. CLEVELAND: Philos. Mag., 21, 416 (1936).
(1G) W. F. DUNTON: Nature (London), 140, 245 (1937).
(17) I. A. ROB]BRTSON: Philos. Mag., 36, 32 (1945).

THE O R I G I N A L A M P E R E FORCE AND T H E B I O T - S A V A R T AND L O R E N T Z rOI~CES

193

t r u s t e d with results arising f r o m t h e six-dimensional considerations of spacet i m e of t h e a u t h o r (is).

The e x p e r i m e n t t u r n e d out to be a simpler vel'sion of Amp~re's original
e x p e r i m e n t w i t h one e x t r a degree of freedom, thus giving m o r e information
a n d in such a w a y as to refute u n a m b i g u o u s l y Maxwell's e x p l a n a t i o n of Amp~re's
e x p e r i m e n t in t e r m s of the B i o t - S a v ~ r t law.
The e x p e r i m e n t consisted of a / / - s h a p e d a l u m i n i u m wire 2 m long, 1.5 m
wide a n d 2 m m in diameter. This wire was suspended b y t h i n threads, forruing a p y r a m i d of a b o u t 2 m height.
Thus t h e / / - s h a p e wire was a l m o s t free to m o v e on a horizontal plane.
The ends of t h e wire were allowed to t o u c h two small cups with mercury, as
shown in fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

W i t h t h e help of a car b a t t e r y , c u r r e n t was supplied to t h e cups as shown.

Immediately, the//shape
was noticed to m o v e f o r w a r d a n d t h e free ends to
j u m p out of t h e m e r c u r y cups, travelling a b o u t 2 e m in less t h a n 1 s. This
reaction Call easily be explained in t h e two ways given b y AMP]~lCE a n d MAXWELL for A m p ~ r e ' s original e x p e r i m e n t m e n t i o n e d above.
l~ow let us accept t h e B i o t - S a v a r t explanation of Maxwell and change
t h e direction in which t h e c u r r e n t is supplied, as shown in fig. 3.
I n this case, t h e B i o t - S a v a r t force which we a s s u m e for t h e first configuration (fig. 2) will pratically not change, as this force is only applied at t h e CD
p a r t of t h e circuit, and is caused b y t h e sections B C a n d E D . Thus one should
again e x p e c t a forward velocity c o m p o n e n t of a b o u t 2 cm/s.
lVevertheless, no such a velocity c o m p o n e n t was noticed at the free ends,
a n d t h e free ends seemed always to m o v e distinctly a w a y f r o m the sections
A B end F E in a w a y d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h e direction A B a n d / ~ E . No independent velocity c o m p o n e n t was noticed, which would h a v e suggested t h a t a force
h a d been acting on section CD, as t h e B i o t - S a v a r t law requires. Thus this
version of A m p S r e ' s e x p e r i m e n t , r e p o r t e d for the first t i m e here, favours

(is) p. T. PAPPAS: Nuovo Cimento B, 68, 111 (1982), and references therein.

194

P.T.

PAPPA8

Amp~re's originM formula a n d unambiguously refutes t h e law of B i o t - S a v a r t

for interactions between current sections.
I n addition, t h e B i o t - S a v a r t law can also be excluded u n d e r e n e r g y considerations of the electromagnetic field, as follows:

Fig. 3.

A//F

The m o m e n t u m gained b y t h e / / - s h a p e Muminium wire in the first configuration (fig. 2) for a mass of 38.2 g and a speed of about 2 cm/s is about
7.64
m/s. I t follows t h a t an opposite m o m e n t u m should be t a k e n
up b y t h e emitted electromagnetic radiation. The e n e r g y of the e m i t t e d radiation will be given b y
(7)

. E ~-- p c

and in our case this is 2.29

J.
1Vow, if we assume t h a t all t h e energy dissipated in t h e circuit goes into
the electromagnetic radiation (actually only a v e r y small fraction of t h e dissipated e n e r g y can go to this speculated radiation, if we consider Joule's heat
losses due to the total Ohmic resistance in the circuit), then, in one second, a
current of about 19 085 A is required at 12 V.
This current is clearly unrealistic, for it exceeds b y two orders of m a g n i t u d e
t h e a c t u a l current in the circuit and because no p a r t of the circuit could withs t a n d it without being destroyed. F u r t h e r , t h e t o t a l dissipated e n e r g y in this
case, if we take into account t h e heat losses, t h e kinetic energy of t h e / / f r a m e
t o g e t h e r with the energy of t h e radiation, is estimated to be 2 . 2
which is 12 times more t h a n t h e t o t a l available e n e r g y stored in t h e b a t t e r y ,
all released in less t h a n one second!... Evidently, t h e Biot-Savart law, or t h e
L o r e n t z force for this case, belong to science fiction...
The relationship of the Biot-Savart law to classical electromagnetic t h e o r y
a n d r e l a t i v i t y theory~ stands as follows:

T I I ~ O R I G I N A L XMP]~R:E FORCE AND TII]fi BIOT-SAVART &ND LOR]~NTZ FORCES

195

1) T h e Biot-Savart law gives precisely Maxwe11's equation for magnetostatics with the condition
(8)

V.J = 0

which limits the case to closed circuits (ref. (~), p. 173).

2) Conversely, Maxwell's equations give the Biot-Sav~rt law in an integrated form for closed circuits (ref. (~s), p. 118).
3) Relativity theory, considering the transformation laws for /~ and B
(rcf. (~), p. 554), for the magnetic field produced by ~ moving charge q, gives

(9)

B -= - q y v
c(Y ~ -t- y~x~) ~ '

y =- (1 -- v~

-~ .

Formula (9) has the following conseTlences:

a) For v << c (which aciually is our case of metallic conductors) formula (9) implies

(10)

qv
cr 3

This is just the Biol-Savart law (2), for I d s ~ - , qv. ] t follows, therefore,
t h a t relativity theory approximates, adequately enough in ore' case of metallic
conductors, the Biot-Savart law. (ref. (s), p. 554).
an infinitely long and straight conductor, formula (9) implies
the precise form of the Biot-Savart law. This is shown in m a n y text books
of electromagnetism as a proof for the consistency of electromagnetic theory
and relativity theory (ref. (~o), p. 537; ref. (2o), p. 277).
b) Y o r

c) Ill general, relativity theory does not imply the Biot-Savart law
independently of the velocity of individual charges (ref. (2o), p. 28]).
Yrom the above we conclude 1he foUowing:
Apart from the theoretical discrepancy mentioned in 3c), the generality of
rehdivity theory should be limited in case 3a), as has been demonstrated
(lg) L. D. L&NDAUand ],:. M. LIFSHITZ: The Classical Theory o] E i e l d s (London, 1962).
(g0) 1). LORRAI~- and D. R. CORSON: Electromagnetic Eields a n d W a v e s (San Francisco,
Cal., 1970).

196

~. T. ~ A ~ r A S

b y t h e a b o v e u n a m b i g u o u s e x p e r i m e n t a l result, as well as b y s e v e r a l o t h e r
similar e x p e r i m e n t a l results, r e f e r r e d to in ref. (s,~3-17,2~.23), etc.
F r o m o b s e r v a t i o n s ] a n d 2, it is clearly i m p l i e d t h a t t h e Maxwell e q u a t i o n
a n d t h e B i o t - S a v a r t law give c o r r e c t results o n l y w h e n t h e y are r e f e r r i n g
to closed circuits. I n t h e case of o p e n circuits or sections of circuits, c h s s i c a l
e l e c t r o m a g n e t i s m a n d special r e l a t i v i t y a p p r o x i m a t e t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of m o v i n g
c h a r g e s or currents, ignoring, at least, l o n g i t u d i n a l i n t e r a c t i o n s w h i c h exist
t o g e t h e r w i t h t r a n s v e r s e ones (7). T h e r e is m o u n t i n g e v i d e n c e for t h e existence of t h e s e l o n g i t u d i n a l forces in various areas of physics, such as are disc h a r g e s , b e a m s , etc. (2x.2a) a n d this evidence f a v o u r s t h e original a n d i g n o r e d
law of A m p e r e a n d is p r o b l e m a t i c for t h e relativistic law of L o r e n t z a n d t h e
B i o t - S a v a r t law.

I w o u l d like to t a k e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y h e r e t o t h a n k Mr. K. K.REiVIIDAS,

s t u d e n t of P h y s i c s a n d M a t h e m a t i c s , for his v a l u a b l e assistance in p e r f o r m i n g
the current interaction experiment.
(21) p. MOON and D. E. SPENCEr: J. ~raukliu Inst., 257, 203 (1954).
(22) 1). MOON and D. E. SPENCER: J. ~rankliu Inst., 257, 305 (1954).
(ca) p. Moon and D. E. SPENCER: J. ~rankliu Inst., 257, 369 (1954).
(24) G. B. W.~,LKER and G. WALKER: Nature (Lo~tdon), 263, 401 (1976).
(25) E. KOB]~L: Phys. Rev., 36, 1636 (1930).
(26) j. D. SV.THIAN and D. A. HAMMEtr Phys. Rev. Lett., 40, 451 (1978).
(27) W. G. DUFFIELD, T. H. BURNHAM and A. H. DAw);s: Philos. Trans. I~. Soc.
London Ser. :1, 220A, 4, 109 (1926).
(2s) H . M . P . STOCk: J. Phys. D, 6, 988 (1973).
(29) R. TAbBinG: Phys. Rev., 35, 1080 (1930).
(ao) H. ASPDEN: I E E E Trans. Plasma Sci. PS-$, No. 3, September (1977).
(31) H. ASPD~N: Physics Uui]ied (Southampton, 1980).
(a2) H. ASeDnN: Physics without Einstein (Southampton, 1969).
(3a) It. ASPD]~N: J. Erauklin Inst., 287, 179 (1969).

RIASSUNT0

(*)

Lo scopo di questo lavoro ~ presentare i risultati di un esperimento molto semplice,

a furore della forza originale di Ampere e a sfavore, senza ambiguitY, della forza di
Biot-Savart di relativits o la sua approssimazione in una forma covariante relativistica,
cio~ la forza di Lorentz. Questo esperimento, con il suo grado di liberth extra, ha il
vantaggio, rispetto a molti altri simili, compreso l'esperimento originale di Ampere,
fatti nel passato e recentemente da Graneau, di dare risultati sia qualitativi ehe quantitativi e non ambigui. Per il forte legume tra le forze di Biot-Savart e Lorentz e le
teorie relativistiche, l'esperimento pub anche essere considerato come una limitazione
al valore generale di queste teorie.
(*)

Traduzione a cura della l~edazione.

THE

ORIGINAL

AMP~3RE

FORCE

AND

THE

BIOT-SAVART

AND

LORENTZ

FORCES

197

1-lepBnqHaH cnaa AMnepa n en~h~ Y;no-Canapa n JIopemla.

Pe3mMe (*). - - IIpI4BO~I~ITC~I pe3ynbTaTJ,I OqeHb npOCTOrO 3KcnepRMenTa, I~OTOpI,1I] OT~laeT

npe~noqTe~ne rlepBI4qHO~ c a n e A M n e p a H O)ItIo3Ha~IHO onpoBepraeT cnny BrIo-CaBapa
B TeopI4i.i OTI-IOCHTeYlbHOCTH, 143/14 ee npn6nn~eHrle B roBaprraaTHO~ peJI~[TaBHCTCKOfi
dpopMe-CrlJ/y Ylopenua. ~TOT axcJaepnMenT c ~onozHnTeablao~ cTenenb~o CBO60)lbl nMeeT
npeHMyuleCTaO nO cpaBHeaa~o c ~lpyrnMI4 nO~IO6H~,IMH aKcnepHMenTaMH, aKnIo~ag nepBo~aqanBHbI~ 9KcnepnMeHT AMnepa, KOTOpbll] 6bIYl ocyttieCTBnen B rlpoIIIYIOM H He)XaaHo
FpaHo. Pe3y~bTaTbI 3KcnepIIMenTa gBSIS~OTC~ KaqecTaeai.iblMtt H KOYIHqeCTBeHHbIMrI, a
TaK~e O~IHO3HaqHblMH. Bcae~cTm~e CmnBnO]2 CB~t3YI Cl&rl:bI B ~ o - C a a a p a ~ cnas~ Ylopen~a
B pen~TI.IBrlCTCK~X Teopnax, n p e ~ l n o ~ e n n b ~ 3~cnepaMeaT MOgUO Ta~me paccMaTpm3aTb,
r a t orpaHn~eHne OSnlHOCTH 9TI~X Teopn~.

(*) 1-1epeeec)eno pebat~ttue?t.