Paradox in Induced Dipole Forces: Does it violate Newton's Third Law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EM-learner
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

SUMMARY

The discussion addresses the apparent paradox in induced dipole forces where the calculated force on the permanent dipole B is twice the force on the induced dipole A, seemingly violating Newton's Third Law. The key correction is that when calculating the force on a dipole, the dipole moment must be treated as constant during differentiation, not variable. Using the dipole force formula ##\vec{F} = (\vec{p} \cdot \nabla) \vec{E}## with a constant dipole moment resolves the discrepancy. The example with charges ##q## at positions ##x+a## and ##x## demonstrates that the force depends on the spatial derivative of the electric field, not on the derivative of the dipole moment itself. This clarifies that induced dipole interactions do not violate Newton's Third Law when properly analyzed.

PREREQUISITES

  • Electrostatics: Dipole electric field equations
  • Vector calculus: Gradient and differentiation of vector fields
  • Atomic polarizability and induced dipole moment concepts
  • Newton's Third Law in classical mechanics

NEXT STEPS

  • Study the derivation and application of the dipole force formula ##\vec{F} = (\vec{p} \cdot \nabla) \vec{E}## in non-uniform fields
  • Explore the role of constant versus variable dipole moments in force calculations
  • Analyze induced dipole interactions in molecular physics using LaTeX for clear mathematical presentation
  • Review classical electrodynamics treatments of dipole-dipole forces and energy conservation

USEFUL FOR

Physics students, researchers in molecular physics and physical chemistry, educators explaining dipole interactions, and anyone analyzing forces in systems with induced dipoles and permanent dipoles.

EM-learner
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Consider a molecule B with a permanent dipole moment $\vec{p}_B = p_B \hat{z}$ and a polarizable molecule A with atomic polarizability $\alpha$. Molecule A is located on the $z$-axis at a distance $z$ from B.
B creates an electric field that induces a dipole moment $\vec{p}_A$ in A.
Calculate the force $\vec{F}_A$ exerted on the induced dipole A.
Calculate the force $\vec{F}_B$ exerted on the permanent dipole B by the field of A.
Compare $\vec{F}_A$ and $\vec{F}_B$. My current derivation shows $\vec{F}_B = 2\vec{F}_A$, which seems to violate Newton's Third Law.
Relevant Equations
Dipole electric field (on-axis): $\vec{E} = \frac{p}{2\pi\epsilon_0 z^3} \hat{z}$
nduced dipole: $\vec{p}_A = \alpha \vec{E}_B$
Force on a dipole in a non-uniform field: $\vec{F} = (\vec{p} \cdot \nabla) \vec{E}$
First, I calculated the field produced by B at the position of A:
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
In Physics Forums you should use ## to wrap in-line LaTeX equations and $$ to wrap display equations. I've reformatted your post below:
EM-earner said:
Homework Statement: Consider a molecule B with a permanent dipole moment ##\vec{p}_B = p_B \hat{z}## and a polarizable molecule A with atomic polarizability ##\alpha##. Molecule A is located on the ##z##-axis at a distance ##z## from B.
B creates an electric field that induces a dipole moment ##\vec{p}_A## in A.
Calculate the force ##\vec{F}_A## exerted on the induced dipole A.
Calculate the force ##\vec{F}_B## exerted on the permanent dipole B by the field of A.
Compare ##\vec{F}_A## and ##\vec{F}_B##. My current derivation shows ##\vec{F}_B = 2\vec{F}_A##, which seems to violate Newton's Third Law.
Relevant Equations: Dipole electric field (on-axis): ##\vec{E} = \frac{p}{2\pi\epsilon_0 z^3} \hat{z}##
Induced dipole: ##\vec{p}_A = \alpha \vec{E}_B##
Force on a dipole in a non-uniform field: ##\vec{F} = (\vec{p} \cdot \nabla) \vec{E}##
First, I calculated the field produced by B at the position of A:
And to make our lives easier, please try using LaTeX to post your solution attempt here, rather than making us all open your PDF attachment.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveE, EM-learner and berkeman
Your mistake comes from differentiating the dipole moment as well, whereas it must be kept constant during the differentiation. To clearly expose the issue, I will redo the calculation in the simplest possible case: a field directed only along the x-axis (which actually corresponds to your situation).

Consider a dipole formed by a charge ##q## at position ##x+a## and a charge ##-q## at position ##x##. The force acting on the dipole is:
$$
F = q\,E(x+a) - q\,E(x)
$$

Using a first-order expansion, this gives:
$$
F = q\,a\,\frac{dE}{dx} = p\,\frac{dE}{dx}
$$

This result remains valid even if ##a## is a function of ##x##. Physically, this means that the dipole, in its instantaneous configuration, responds to the spatial variation of the field.

In your case, ##a## is a function of ##x##, and you write:
$$
q\,\frac{d(aE)}{dx}
$$
which is incorrect.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TSny
renormalize said:
In Physics Forums you should use ## to wrap in-line LaTeX equations and $$ to wrap display equations. I've reformatted your post below:


And to make our lives easier, please try using LaTeX to post your solution attempt here, rather than making us all open your PDF attachment.
Thanks a lot !!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
920
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K