Finding the electric field in Griffiths

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around problem 2.25 from Griffiths, which involves calculating the electric potential and electric field at a distance 'z' above the midpoint between two charges, first when they are equal and then when they are opposite. Participants are exploring the implications of the results obtained in both scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants discuss the calculation of electric potential and field for both equal and opposite charges, noting discrepancies in expected results.
  • Questions arise regarding the assumption that a zero potential implies a zero electric field, prompting further exploration of the gradient of potential.
  • One participant suggests using generalized coordinates to approach the problem, emphasizing the importance of the order of operations in differentiation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, sharing their interpretations and calculations. There is a recognition of discrepancies between the two cases, and some guidance is offered regarding the use of generalized coordinates. However, there is no explicit consensus on the resolution of the discrepancies at this stage.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for additional context from problem 2.2 for comparison, indicating that the relationship between the two problems is significant for understanding the current discussion.

Reshma
Messages
749
Reaction score
6
This is referring to problem 2.25 in Griffiths. Find the potential at a distance 'z' above the midpoint between two equal charges, q, a distance 'd' apart. Compute the electric field in each case.
In the first part the charges are equal. The electric potential is:
[tex]V = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{2q}{{\sqrt{z^2 + (d^2/4)}}}[/tex]
In this case, electric field given by [itex]\vec E = -\nabla V[/itex] is:
[tex]\vec E = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{2qz}{[{z^2 + (d^2/4)}]^{(3/2)}}} \hat z[/tex]
Matches with the result known in problem 2.2(a).

In the 2nd case we consider oppositely charges +q & -q. In this case the electric potential V = 0 which naively(:wink:) suggests [itex]\vec E = -\nabla V = 0[/itex] which is in contradiction to a previous known result in problem 2.2(b) which suggests:
[tex]\vec E = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{qd}{[{z^2 + (d^2/4)}]^{(3/2)}} \hat z[/tex]

How is this discrepancy accounted for?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have the book with me right now. It would help if you posted the problem from 2.2 for comparison.
 
Reshma said:
In the 2nd case we consider oppositely charges +q & -q. In this case the electric potential V = 0 which naively(:wink:) suggests [itex]\vec E = -\nabla V = 0[/itex]

Why does V=0 even naively suggest that [itex]\nabla V[/itex], it's gradient is zero?
 
Jelfish said:
I don't have the book with me right now. It would help if you posted the problem from 2.2 for comparison.

Alright, here are both the questions:

Prob2.25: Find the electric potential at a distance 'z' above the midpoint between two charges +q and +q with 'd' being the distance between them. Also find the potential if the charges are -q and +q. Compute [itex]\vec E = -\nabla V[/itex] and compare your answer with prob.2.2. Explain carefully any discrepancy.

Prob2.2: Find the electric field at a distance 'z' above the midpoint between two charges +q and +q with 'd' being the distance between them. Repeat the problem with the charges as -q and +q.

This should be helpful to solve my problem.
 
For 2.25, calculate the potential using generalized coordinates first. That is,

[tex]V=kq \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{(x+\frac{d}{2})^2+y^2+z^2}} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{(x-\frac{d}{2})^2+y^2+z^2}} \right)[/tex]

Switch to minus for the second part. Take the above expression's derivative and then plug in (0,0,z). The reason for this is that you lose the derivatives with respect to x and y if you plug in (0,0,z) before taking the derivative.

As a note, it may also help if you think about electric field lines. For two opposite charges next to each other, the field lines go from the positive to the negative, like in this picture:

http://electron9.phys.utk.edu/phys136d/modules/m4/images/dipole.gif

Now, if you were to orient the two charges on the x-axis and your point were somewhere away from the midpoint on the z-axis, as you can see, the resultant field is not in the z direction. In fact, it's in the x-direction. Knowing this intuitively, you should expect the x-component to not go away. The only way to find it is to first use generalized coordinates.

I hope that helps some.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
6K