Please help in part of derivation in retarted potential formula.

In summary, the conversation is about deriving a part of the equation involving the divergence of current density and the charge continuity equation. The speaker is unsure about how to get the first term in the equation and is asking for help. Another speaker explains the use of the chain rule and how the retarded time is dependent on the source point, providing a detailed explanation. The original speaker thanks the other for their help and asks for clarification on another equation they disagree with in the book.
  • #1
yungman
5,718
241
This is part of the derivation that I cannot do, this is to show:

[tex]\nabla'\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} =-\frac {\partial \rho_{(\vec r\;',t_r)}}{\partial t} -\frac 1 c \frac {\partial \vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)}}{\partial t_r}\cdot(\nabla'\eta) \;\hbox { where } \;\eta = |\vec r - \vec r\;'| \;\hbox { ,}\; t_r= t-\frac {\eta}{c} \;\hbox { and }\; c=\frac 1 {\sqrt{\mu_0\epsilon_0}}[/tex]

The book claimed the first term [itex]\rho [/itex] is from continunity equation. I just don't know how to get this.

[itex]\nabla [/itex] is respect to [itex]\vec r [/itex] and [itex]\nabla' [/itex] is respect to [itex]\vec r\;' [/itex]

I have no problem solving:

[tex]\nabla\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} = \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial z} \;=\;-\frac 1 c \left ( \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial z}\right ) \;=\; -\frac 1 c \frac {\partial \vec J}{\partial t_r} \cdot (\nabla \eta)[/tex]

I thought it is just the same:

[tex]\nabla'\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} = \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial x'} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial y'} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial z'} \;=\;\frac 1 c \left ( \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial x'} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial y'} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial z'}\right ) \;=\; -\frac 1 c \frac {\partial \vec J}{\partial t_r} \cdot (\nabla \eta)[/tex]


Please help.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Also [tex]\vec A =\frac {\mu_0}{4\pi} \int \frac {\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)}}{\eta} d\tau' [/tex]

Means the potential A at the field point (x,y,z) at time t is the result of the current density at the source point (x',y',z') at the retarded time [itex]t_r[/itex]. Then:

[tex]\nabla\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} = \frac {\partial J_ {x'} }{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_{y'}}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_{z'}}{\partial z} [/tex]

Instead of

[tex]\nabla\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} = \frac {\partial J_ {x} }{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_{y}}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_{z}}{\partial z} [/tex]

Shown in the book. Because J is located at the source point (x',y',z') instead of at the field point (x,y,z). Am I correct?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Anyone please? I am stuck! At least one of the two post!

Thanks

Alan
 
  • #4
You understand the charge continuity equation, right? It is one of the constitutive equations of electrodynamics. If you have a net current over a closed volume, then this means that there is a net flow of charges into or out of the volume and thus the charge density in the volume must be changing with time. You can easily use integral forms with the divergence theorem to recast this more explicitly but reflection upon the physical meaning of the divergence operator should show the same phenomenon.

That being said, this is just an example of the chain rule. You need to remember that the retarded time is also dependent upon your source point. So if you keep your observation point fixed (r and t) and you vary your source point (r') then you will vary both r' and t'. Thus, when you take the derivative of your retarded potentials you need to make use of the chain rule.

Thus,

[tex] \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial x'} = \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial y(x')} \frac{\partial y(x')}{\partial x'} + \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial z(x')} \frac{\partial z(x')}{\partial x'} [/tex]

Using this with the charge continuity equation:

[tex] \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{x'} = \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} = \nabla' \cdot \left[ \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} - \left[ \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J} }{\partial t'} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \left( t' \right) = -\frac{\partial \rho_{ret}}{\partial t} - \left[ \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J} }{\partial t'} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \left( t' \right) [/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Born2bwire said:
You understand the charge continuity equation, right? It is one of the constitutive equations of electrodynamics. If you have a net current over a closed volume, then this means that there is a net flow of charges into or out of the volume and thus the charge density in the volume must be changing with time. You can easily use integral forms with the divergence theorem to recast this more explicitly but reflection upon the physical meaning of the divergence operator should show the same phenomenon.

That being said, this is just an example of the chain rule. You need to remember that the retarded time is also dependent upon your source point. So if you keep your observation point fixed (r and t) and you vary your source point (r') then you will vary both r' and t'. Thus, when you take the derivative of your retarded potentials you need to make use of the chain rule.

Thus,

[tex] \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial x'} = \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial y(x')} \frac{\partial y(x')}{\partial x'} + \frac{\partial f(y(x'),z(x'))}{\partial z(x')} \frac{\partial z(x')}{\partial x'} [/tex]

Using this with the charge continuity equation:

[tex] \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{x'} = \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} = \nabla' \cdot \left[ \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} - \left[ \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J} }{\partial t'} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \left( t' \right) = -\frac{\partial \rho_{ret}}{\partial t} - \left[ \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J} }{\partial t'} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \left( t' \right) [/tex]

Thanks so much for taking the time to help. I was going to give up on this already!

I still need to think more about this, but one question, why don't I need to do this if the divergence is at the field point r? This is given from the book:

[tex]\nabla\cdot\vec J_{(\vec r\;',t_r)} = \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial t_r}{\partial z} \;=\;-\frac 1 c \left ( \frac {\partial J_x}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial x} + \frac {\partial J_y}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial y} +\frac {\partial J_z}{\partial t_r} \frac { \partial \eta}{\partial z}\right ) \;=\; -\frac 1 c \frac {\partial \vec J}{\partial t_r} \cdot (\nabla \eta)[/tex]

I don't understand this equation:

[tex] \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{x'} = \left[ \nabla' \cdot \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} [/tex]



Also can you help on post #2? I disagree with the book because even you take the divergence respect to the field point ([itex] \nabla \cdot \vec J[/itex]), the J is always locates at the source point (x',y',z') so it should be Jx', jy', jz' instead. Am I correct?

Thanks so much.

Alan
 
  • #6
can anyone help, I don't quite get the post #4.

Thanks
 
  • #7
Eh, I don't have time to work it out exactly but I fudged the LHS obviously since the divergence of the position vector is not always unity. Maybe it needs to be scaled by the norm of the vector, I don't know. The point is that there is a factor there but it always comes out to be one. Maybe the proper way of showing it was from a tensor product.

The point is though is that it is just an application of the chain rule. The problem is that you need to think about how you are differentiating the functions.

The retarded current is a vector function that goes something like,

[tex] \left[ \mathbf{J} \right]_{ret} = \left[ \mathbf{J} (\mathbf{r}', t') \right]_{ret} =
\mathbf{J} (\mathbf{r}', t-R/c) [/tex]

The retarded time is dependent upon your observation point just as the position vector. So when you take the divergence, are you taking the divergence with respect to changing r' and constant t', changing r' and changing t'(r'), etc. These divergences are different.

So what are we interested in when we work these Maxwell equations?

In Maxwell's equations we relate the fields in response to the retarded sources (assuming the Lorenz Gauge). For example,

[tex] \mathbf{E}(\mathbf{r},t) = k_{something} \int d\mathbf{r}' \frac{1}{R} \left[ -\nabla' \rho - \frac{1}{c^2} \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J}} {\partial t'} \right]_{ret} [/tex]

This comes from the fact that the effective source for the electric field is

[tex] \mathbf{s}(\mathbf{r},t) =-\nabla \rho - \frac{1}{c^2} \frac{ \partial \mathbf{J}} {\partial t} [/tex]

So we find the retarded Green's function and use that in an integral with the source and we find that the retarded Green's function forces the source in the resulting integral to be acting with the retarded time (which we of course expect).

So essentially, we are interested in things like

[tex] \left[ \nabla' \rho \right]_{ret} [/tex]

where we are taking the gradient with respect to changing r' but constant t'. But we do not want to work in that case. We want the gradient to be respect to changing r' and changing t'(r'). That is, we want to express the resulting fields using

[tex] \nabla' \left[ \rho \right]_{ret} [/tex]

So, we use the chain rule with:

[tex] \nabla' \left[\rho\right]_{ret} = \left[ \nabla' \rho \right]_{ret} + \left[ \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t'} \right]_{ret} \nabla' (t-R/c) [/tex]

where taking the derivative outside the brackets means that both x' and t' can vary while inside the brackets x' varies and t' is fixed.

That is, we take the derivative with respect to x' on a function that is dependent upon y(x') and z(x'). The first term we take the derivative of the function with respect to y(x') assuming z(x') is constant. The second term we take the derivative of the function with respect to z(x') assuming y(x') is constant.

So, y(x') = x' and z(x') = t'. Now, the derivative with respect to y(x') is the same as taking the derivative with respect to x' and we just assume that the retarded time is fixed (and since y(x') = x' there is no additional factor from the \partial y(x') / \partial (x') ). The derivative with respect to z(x') is the same as taking the derivative with respect to t' with the gradient of t' as the additional factor.

EDIT: As for your second posts, I do not understand what the subscripts x, x', etc. mean.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the formula for retarded potential?

The formula for retarded potential is V(r, t) = kQ/r - kQ(r-vt)/c*r, where k is the Coulomb constant, Q is the charge, r is the distance from the charge, t is the time, v is the velocity of the charge, and c is the speed of light.

2. How is the retarded potential formula derived?

The retarded potential formula is derived from the electric field equation, which states that the electric field at a point is equal to the charge at that point divided by the square of the distance from the charge. By integrating the electric field over time, the potential at a point can be calculated, resulting in the retarded potential formula.

3. What is the significance of the retarded potential formula?

The retarded potential formula is significant because it allows for the calculation of the electric potential at any point in space and time, taking into account the finite speed of light. This is important in understanding the behavior of electric fields and how they interact with charged particles.

4. Can the retarded potential formula be applied to moving charges?

Yes, the retarded potential formula can be applied to moving charges. The formula includes the velocity of the charge, which allows for the calculation of the potential at different points in space and time as the charge moves.

5. Are there any limitations to the retarded potential formula?

One limitation of the retarded potential formula is that it assumes a vacuum between the charge and the point where the potential is being calculated. In reality, there may be other factors that can affect the potential, such as the presence of other charges or conductive materials.

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
465
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
404
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
989
  • Mechanics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
140
Replies
5
Views
883
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
776
Back
Top