ARTICLE COMMENTARY | AUGUST 07 2023

Comment on “Transverse vibration analysis of single-

layered graphene sheet under magneto-thermal environment
based on non-local plate theory [J. Appl. Phys. 116(16),
164303 (2014)]” and “Nonlocal elasticity based magnetic
field affected vibration response of double single-walled
carbon nanotube systems [J. Appl. Phys. 111(11), 113511
(2012)]” 
Rakesh Sinha  ; Ankit Mishra

J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023)

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0159263

CrossMark

 
View Export
Online Citation

Articles You May Be Interested In

Nonlocal integral‐equation approximations. I. The zeroth order (hydrostatic) approximation with

06 October 2023 12:45:20

applications
J. Chem. Phys. (May 1990)

Nonlocal transverse vibration of double-nanobeam-systems

J. Appl. Phys. (October 2010)

Native American astronomy

Physics Today (June 1984)
 Journal of
COMMENT pubs.aip.org/aip/jap
Applied Physics

Comment on “Transverse vibration analysis of

single-layered graphene sheet under magneto-
thermal environment based on non-local plate
theory [J. Appl. Phys. 116(16), 164303 (2014)]” and
“Nonlocal elasticity based magnetic field affected
vibration response of double single-walled carbon
nanotube systems [J. Appl. Phys. 111(11), 113511
(2012)]”
Cite as: J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0159263
Submitted: 22 May 2023 · Accepted: 1 July 2023 · View Online Export Citation CrossMark
Published Online: 7 August 2023

Rakesh Sinhaa) and Ankit Mishrab)

AFFILIATIONS

06 October 2023 12:45:20

Department of Electrical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Rourkela 769008, India

a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: sinhar@nitrkl.ac.in
b)
Electronic mail: 120ee0480@nitrkl.ac.in

ABSTRACT
The impact of a time-varying external magnetic field on carbon nanotubes has been studied using Maxwell’s equations in the mentioned
articles. However, the Maxwell’s equations are erroneously presented in the papers. The incorrect Maxwell’s equations, their derivatives, and
the Lorentz force equations have all been examined in this work. In this article, we have endeavored to ensure that the equations are format-
ted correctly and have made an effort to do so. We have made an effort to intuitively correct the equations’ errors. We did not comment on
the other portions of the mentioned articles; instead, we restricted ourselves to the examination of the impact of Maxwell’s equations and
Lorentz force equations.

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0159263

NOMENCLATURE r Position vector in m

v=@r
@t Velocity vector in m/s
B = μH Magnetic flux density in Wb/m2
H Magnetic field intensity in A/m
D=ϵE Electric flux density in C/m2 I. INTRODUCTION
E Electric field intensity in V/m Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations are the key to understand
ϵ¼ ϵr ϵ0 Permittivity with relative permittivity ϵr and vacuum how any material reacts to an electromagnetic field. Maxwell’s
permittivity ϵ0 equations hold for every system placed in an electromagnetic field,
μ ¼ μr μ0 Permeability with relative permeability μr and vacuum and their basic structure cannot be changed. Contrary to what was
permeability μ0 previously stated, Maxwell’s equations have undergone changes that
J Electric current density in A/m2 have rendered them even dimensionally wrong in certain recent

J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0159263 134, 056103-1

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Journal of
Applied Physics
works (Refs. 1 and 2) on the study of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) in
the presence of an external magnetic field.
In this letter, we attempt to correct errors made in earlier
studies1,2 on the study of carbon nanotubes in the presence of an
external magnetic field. Although these studies mistakenly cited
J. D. Krause Electromagnetics3 as a reference to the Maxwell
Equations. However, J. D. Krause3 never wrote erroneous Maxwell
equations. To the best of the authors’ understanding, the source of
erroneous Maxwell’s equations is the work by Wang,4 and it has
been propagated to other works.1,2,5 Using the appropriate Maxwell
equations from J. D. Krause Electromagnetics,3 we have attempted
to examine the circumstances that had been described in the earlier
studies. Some of the outcomes dependent on the analysis of
Maxwell equations have been corrected in this work. The investiga-
tion will be limited to the erroneous Maxwell’s equation in the
mentioned studies.
The authors employed the Lorentz force equation and
Maxwell’s equations from J. D. Kraus Electromagnetics3 to examine
the impact of the in-plane uni-axial magnetic field. However, some
of Maxwell’s equations and the Lorentz force equation mentioned
in the work (Refs. 1 and 2) are erroneous, and the conclusions
drawn from them need to be corrected, in contrast to J. D. Kraus’s
Electromagnetics.3 The significant inaccuracy in the mathematical
formulae cannot be disregarded. Results from those articles’ cita-
tions may also need to be corrected due to the erroneous Maxwell
equations. Thus, we should take some steps to restrict further prop-
agation of error.
II. COMPARISON OF EQUATIONS USED IN CITED
PAPERS AND J. D. KRAUS
This section will be comparing Maxwell’s equations that have
been used in the papers1,2 and Maxwell’s equations that have been
stated in the J. D. Kraus Electromagnetics.3
Maxwell’s equations that are present in Refs. 1 and 2 are
∇:h ¼ 0,
J ¼ ∇  H,
@h
∇  e ¼ η , (3)
@t


@U
e ¼ η H ,
@t
h ¼ ∇  (U  H):
According to Ref. 1 where the authors have denoted J,h,e, and η as
current density, magnetic flux vector, the intensity of the electric
field, and magnetic field permeability, respectively. ∇ is the
@^ @ ^
Hamiltonian operator that is expressed as ∇ ¼ @x i þ @y j þ @z k,
^ ^ ^
where i, j, and k are the unit vectors in the three axes.
H represents the magnetic field vector and is expressed as
H ¼ (Hx^i þ Hy ^j þ Hz ^k). The authors have tried to combine
Maxwell’s equations with the Lorentz force equations to produce
J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0159263
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
COMMENT pubs.aip.org/aip/jap
(4). But during the manipulation of the equations, there had been
no mention of the reason why the Lorentz force has been consid-
ered as 0 while deriving (4). Equation (5) is the result of the combi-
nation of (3) and (4), but Eq. (5) is incorrect and even the correct
relation is very different from the equation that had been men-
tioned in the papers.1,2 In Secs. III and IV, we will examine (1)–(5).
We will also demonstrate the authors’ errors and the right way to
create the equations.
Now we will be describing Maxwell’s equations that are taken
from J. D. Krause.3
The Gauss’s electric field relation,3 Eqs. (8)–(29):
∇:D ¼ ρv : (6)
The magnetic counterpart of Gauss’s electric field relation,3
Eqs. (8)–(31):
∇:B ¼ 0: (7)
Maxwell’s equation derived from Ampere’s law,3 Eqs. (7)–(127):
@D
∇H¼Jþ : (8)
@t
Maxwell’s equation from Faraday’s Law,3 Eqs. (7)–(60):
@B
∇E¼ : (9)
@t
06 October 2023 12:45:20
Equations (1)–(3) are the derived forms of Eqs. (7)–(9) in some
special conditions. But there are some errors in Eqs. (1)–(3), which
we will determine in Sec. III.
III. ANALYSIS OF ERRONEOUS EQUATION
Section II listed the equations found in the works cited as
Refs. 1 and 2. In this section, we will examine each equation indi-
(1)
vidually in the context of J. D. Kraus3 and attempt to identify any
flaws. The mathematics to rectify these equations will be worked
(2) out in the following section.
(1) Equation (1) is Gauss’s counterpart of the electric field, which
suggest that the divergence of magnetic flux density is always
zero. We can determine that h is either magnetic flux density
B or magnetic field intensity H, when we compare Eq. (1) with
(4) Eq. (7). But contrary to our finding, h has been represented as
the magnetic flux vector that is entirely different. We will dis-
cover which of the two mentioned quantities is the appropriate
(5) substitute for h later. Later on, the usage of h becomes impor-
tant in other equations as well, which is one of the reasons for
the error in these equations.
(2) Equation (2) is Maxwell’s equation derived from Ampere’s law
(8). It represents that a circulating magnetic field is created by
@ ^
the current flowing through a wire. By comparing Eq. (2) with
the Eq. (8), we find that the term @D @t is missing. May be the
authors had analyzed the equations inside the carbon nanotube
(CNT), which is a conductor. Inside the conductor, only the
conduction current density J is present, and there is no
134, 056103-2
 Journal of
COMMENT pubs.aip.org/aip/jap
Applied Physics

displacement current density @D @t . As a result, we determine force equation

that the first condition, @D
@t ¼ 0 is true.
0
(3) When compared to Eq. (9), Eq. (3) appears to be Maxwell’s F ¼ qE þ q(v  B), (11)
equation from Faraday’s law. However, there are errors in the
equation. To start, according to the symbols authors have given where q and v are the charge and velocity of any particle,
in their papers, h should actually be H. In Sec. IV, we will respectively. Now we know that v ¼ @r ^ ^ ^
@t , where r ¼ x i þ y j þ z k
demonstrate the derivation. is the position vector. Therefore, we can rewrite (11) as
(4) The Lorentz force equation is the source of Eq. (4). The
Lorentz force must be set to zero in order to arrive at Eq. (4), 

0 @r
although the justification for this omission is not given. In Sec. IV, F¼q E þμ H : (12)
@t
we will derive Eq. (4).
(5) Actually, Eq. (5) is entirely incorrect. However using Eqs. (3)
Now, if we consider F ¼ 0 in (12), it will lead to
and (4), one can get a form that is comparable to that. In the
following part, we will demonstrate the derivation.

0 @r
E ¼ μ H : (13)
@t
IV. DERIVATION AND MATHEMATICS
Hence, we reached Eq. (4).
In Sec. III, we analyzed the errors present in equations stated (5) Equation (5) is entirely incorrect, as shown in the following
in the papers.1,2 In this section, we will try to derive the correct discussion. By carefully examining the equations, we can see
mathematical expressions for Eqs. (1) to (5). We utilize the stan- that by re-configuring the correct forms of Eqs. (3) and (4), we
dard symbols for deriving the expressions because the authors’ may arrive at a form that is comparable to Eq. (5). Here, we
symbols are incorrect and misleading. Additionally, we will present carefully take advantage of the impact of an external magnetic
the final derived equations using the conventions we outlined at and electric field. The correct form of Eqs. (3) and (4) are Eqs.
the start of this paper. (10) and (13). Take the curl of Eq. (13),
(1) Equation (1) is expressed as ∇:h ¼ 0, which is analogous to 

∇B ¼ 0 or ∇H ¼ 0. Here, h has been represented as magnetic 0 @r
∇  E ¼ μ ∇  H : (14)
flux vector (Φ) in the paper.1 Even Φ is scalar, so there is no @t

06 October 2023 12:45:20

such term called magnetic flux vector. In papers,2 the term
distribution of the magnetic field has been used, which is Substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (14),
confusing and can be interpreted as magnetic field intensity

0
H. The correct term for h can be either be assumed as mag- @H @r
netic flux density B ¼ dΦ ¼∇ H , (15)
ds or magnetic field intensity H. Φ is @t @t
the magnetic flux and s is the surface area. Both B and H are
correct but by carefully analyzing the other equations, we con- 0 
 
clude that using H instead of h is more effective. @H @r @r
¼ (∇:H)  ∇: H : (16)
(2) Equation (2) has no error, but displacement current has been @t @t @t
neglected, i.e., @D
@t ¼ 0.
(3) Equation (3) has a symbolic error as described in Sec. III, From Eq. (7), we can write ∇:H ¼ 0. Therefore, (16) can be
instead of h there should be H according to the symbols inter- rewritten as
preted in the papers.1,2 We know that B ¼ μH. Therefore, we
0

can rewrite (9) as @H @r
¼  ∇: H: (17)
@t @t
@H
∇  E ¼ μ : (10)
@t In the present situation, the magnetic field intensity caused by
0
the external magnetic field is H, whereas H is the magnetic
Equation (10) is the correct form of Eq. (3).
field intensity caused by the external electric field. The closest
(4) By assuming that the Lorentz force on every charged particle is
equivalents of Eq. (5) that we can come up with are Eqs. (15)
zero, Eq. (4) is produced. This assumption has not been sup-
ported by any evidence in papers.1,2 The Lorentz force may and (17).
only be zero when a particle is traveling in the direction of the In the papers,1,2 to find out the Lorentz magnetic force on any
electromagnetic wave’s propagation k and is moving at a veloc- current carrying element is given by the equation
ity v such that the effects of magnetic and electric forces are
equalizing one another. But inside the conductor, there is no F ¼ η(J  H): (18)
existence of the electromagnetic wave, so the only possibility to
make Lorentz’s force zero is to introduce an external electric Even though the formula is dimensionally inaccurate and errone-
0
field E . The following is how Eq. (4) is derived using Lorentz ous. Also, every result derived from this formula may be completely

J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0159263 134, 056103-3

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Journal of
COMMENT pubs.aip.org/aip/jap
Applied Physics

ambiguous. The correct formula is citing a source, one should study the original source instead of
ð relying on the reference that cited the original one.
F ¼ μ (Idl  H): (19)
AUTHOR DECLARATIONS
1,2
Therefore, in the papers,Ð the authors have wrongly interpreted Conflict of Interest
Idl as J. Actually I ¼ J:ds. Here, dl and ds are infinitesimal The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
length vector and infinitesimal area vector, respectively.

V. CONCLUSION REFERENCES
1
The incorrect Maxwell’s equations, their derivatives, and the U. Mandal and S. C. Pradhan, “Transverse vibration analysis of single-layered
Lorentz force equation that are featured in the articles1,2 have been graphene sheet under magneto-thermal environment based on nonlocal plate
theory,” J. Appl. Phys. 116, 164303 (2014).
investigated in this study. We have written the equations correctly 2
T. Murmu, M. A. McCarthy, and S. Adhikari, J. Appl. Phys. 111, 113511
and fixed them as much as possible. (2012).
Our goal in this study was to correct the basic errors that 3
J. D. Kraus, Electromagnetics (McGraw-Hill, 1953).
appeared in the publications.1,2 Recognizing these flaws is crucial 4
H. Wang, K. Dong, F. Men, Y. Yan, and X. Wang, Appl. Math. Modell. 34, 878
since failing to do so might lead to inaccurate findings when these (2010).
5
articles are used in the future. Finally, it is concluded that before T. Murmu, M. McCarthy, and S. Adhikari, Compos. Struct. 96, 57 (2013).

06 October 2023 12:45:20

J. Appl. Phys. 134, 056103 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0159263 134, 056103-4

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing