I need to apply Euler's formula to the following, 1st order PDEs which are boundary conditions for a numerical physics problem in magneto-statics:
$$\partial_r{A_\phi}^n = \partial_r{A_\phi}^m$$ $$[\partial_z{A_\phi}^n = \frac{\mu_m}{\mu_n}\partial_z{A_\phi}^m]\hat{\phi}$$
To provide some context, these are meant to ensure continuity across a boundary on the $\pm \hat{z}$ surfaces of a cylinder material in a vacuum. This is in cylindrical coordinates where the $n$ and $m$ superscripts indicate the material and vacuum space around it (On either side of the boundary), the vector function is representing. I can simplify them down to:
$$\partial_r({A_\phi}^n - {A_\phi}^m)=0$$ $$\partial_z({A_\phi}^n - \frac{\mu_m}{\mu_n}{A_\phi}^m)\hat{\phi}=0$$
I know what the Euler formula is and have seen a few examples of how it's applied, but for these specific equations, I am not sure how it is applied. This is because for two reasons:
These equations have vector functions A that are distinctly different on either side of the boundary, so I can't just solve for $\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}$ directly I think? Also, this implies that I cannot just forward/backward solve with the previous solution point, because it's saying I need to take into account both the forward and backward solution points (Indicated by n and m) and so it makes me think I can't use Euler's formula at all because of that but apparently I can and so my logic is flawed somewhere.
It looks like these equations are essentially in the form needed for Euler's formula: $\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}= f(x,y)$, but then that would mean that my $f(x,y)=0$ (After dividing out the LHS terms).
Some clarity is appreciated.