Confused with this integral from Griffith's electrodynamics.

In summary, you solved the electric field not at P but say at Q where QA=d, angle QAB is rectangle and, A and B are the ends of the line.
  • #1
jaded2112
10
2
Homework Statement
The problem is to find the electric field due to a line charge of length 2L, above the mid point at a distance d.
Relevant Equations
This was pretty straightforward and I solved the resulting integral but came to a confusing part where the book plugged the limits from -L to L and came up with the first solution whereas i plugged it in from 0 to 2L and came up with a different solution. I was just wondering where i screwed up.
IMG_20200327_221058.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Your solution shows electric field not at P but say at Q where QA=d, angle QAB is rectangle and, A and B are the ends of the line.
 
  • Like
Likes jaded2112
  • #3
mitochan said:
Your solution shows electric field not at P but say at Q where QA=d, angle QAB is rectangle and, A and B are the ends of the line.
Are you saying that evaluating it over 0 to 2L would not make it symmetric? If that is the case, then if i were to say, shift the line charge L units to the right and put the limits from 0 to 2L would it be correct? I'm abit confused as to why I need to evaluate the integral by specifying the position of dx with respect to the mid point of the line. Thanks.
 
  • #4
jaded2112 said:
I'm abit confused as to why I need to evaluate the integral by specifying the position of dx with respect to the mid point of the line. Thanks.
You do not have to. And if your position is not above the mid point, as Q is not, you observe not only vertical but also horizontal component of E , coefficients of which are sin##\theta## and do not vanish in integration.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes jaded2112
  • #5
What's your reason for integrating from 0 to ##2L##?
 
  • Like
Likes jaded2112
  • #6
vela said:
What's your reason for integrating from 0 to ##2L##?
Well when i was working on my soln, i drew a figure where the length of the line charge extendend from 0 to 2L which is different from the book(Griffith drew it from - L to L as you can see from the figure in my post) . So i subdivided the line into two equal x's from the mid point and integrated it from there.
 
  • #7
mitochan said:
You do not have to. And if your position is not above the mid point, as Q is not, you observe not only vertical but also horizontal component of E , coefficients of which are sin##\theta## and do not vanish in integration.
I understand it can be done in a way
which takes advantage of the symmetry of the problem, but i was wondering how to solve it by extending the line charge from 0 to 2L rather than - L to L. I apologize if this seems trivial.
 
  • #8
Say the line is -L to L, Px=0. The distance from the line element is
[tex]\sqrt{(x-0)^2+d^2}=\sqrt{x^2+d^2}[/tex]
Integration is easy as you do.

Say the line is 0 to 2L, Px=L. The distance from the line element is
[tex]\sqrt{(x-L)^2+d^2}[/tex]
It appears a litte bit more tedious to do integration but the same result, isn't it?
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK and jaded2112
  • #9
mitochan said:
Say the line is -L to L, Px=0. The distance from the line element is
[tex]\sqrt{(x-0)^2+d^2}=\sqrt{x^2+d^2}[/tex]
Integration is easy as you do.

Say the line is 0 to 2L, Px=L. The distance from the line element is
[tex]\sqrt{(x-L)^2+d^2}[/tex]
It appears a litte bit more tedious to do integration but the same result, isn't it?
Yes, it does seem more tedious but I am still confused as to why we treat Px as the origin, i.e. why do we measure the distance from the length element on the x-axis (x-L) from Px as opposed to measuring it from (0,0), where we would
 
  • #10
jaded2112 said:
Yes, it does seem more tedious but I am still confused as to why we treat Px as the origin, i.e. why do we measure the distance from the length element on the x-axis (x-L) from Px as opposed to measuring it from (0,0), where we would
Never mind i think i got it now. Thanks for your time.
 

1. What is the integral in Griffith's electrodynamics?

The integral in Griffith's electrodynamics is a mathematical representation of the relationship between electric and magnetic fields in an electromagnetic wave. It is used to calculate the strength and direction of these fields at any given point in space and time.

2. Why is the integral confusing?

The integral in Griffith's electrodynamics can be confusing because it involves advanced mathematical concepts and notation, and it may not be familiar to those without a strong background in physics and mathematics. Additionally, the integral may involve multiple variables and complex functions, making it difficult to understand at first glance.

3. How is the integral used in electrodynamics?

The integral in Griffith's electrodynamics is used to solve problems related to electromagnetic waves, such as calculating the electric and magnetic fields of a given wave or determining the behavior of these fields in different materials. It is also used to derive important equations, such as Maxwell's equations, which describe the behavior of electromagnetic fields.

4. What are some tips for understanding the integral in Griffith's electrodynamics?

Some tips for understanding the integral in Griffith's electrodynamics include practicing with simpler integrals first, breaking down the integral into smaller parts, and consulting with a teacher or tutor for clarification. It may also be helpful to review basic concepts in calculus and vector calculus to better understand the notation and processes involved in the integral.

5. How can I improve my skills in using the integral in Griffith's electrodynamics?

To improve your skills in using the integral in Griffith's electrodynamics, it is important to practice solving problems and familiarize yourself with the notation and concepts involved. You can also read textbooks and other resources on electrodynamics, attend lectures or workshops, and work with a study group or tutor to strengthen your understanding of the integral and its applications.

Similar threads

  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
485
  • Classical Physics
Replies
5
Views
877
Replies
1
Views
963
Replies
1
Views
458
Back
Top