Compute ∇(1/r): Solving a Sphere Integral

  • Thread starter Thread starter hhhmortal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Sphere
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around computing the gradient of the function \(1/r\) and its implications for the integral of the Laplacian over a spherical volume that contains the origin. Participants are tasked with showing that the integral of the Laplacian of \(1/r\) equals \(-4\pi\) when integrated over a sphere containing the origin.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the difficulty of differentiating \(1/r\) at the origin and explore alternative methods to approach the problem. Some suggest using the gradient of \(1/r\) and its relation to the surface integral over a sphere. Others question how the Dirac delta function applies in this context and its implications for the volume integral.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the relationship between the gradient and the Laplacian of \(1/r\). Some guidance has been offered regarding the treatment of the origin and the use of the Dirac delta function, but no consensus has been reached on the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem typically specifies not including the origin in the integration due to the undefined nature of \(1/r\) at that point. There is also mention of the Laplacian of \(1/r\) being defined as a Dirac delta function at the origin, which adds complexity to the discussion.

hhhmortal
Messages
175
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



By computing ∇(1/r) show that

∫∇²(1/r).dV = -4Pi if the volume 'V' is a sphere containing the origin.

The Attempt at a Solution



∫∇²(1/r).dV = ∫∇(1/r).dS But I can't differentiate (1/r) since the sphere contains the origin. I am wondering if there's any other way to tackle this.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hhhmortal said:

Homework Statement



By computing ∇(1/r) show that

∫∇²(1/r).dV = -4Pi if the volume 'V' is a sphere containing the origin.





The Attempt at a Solution



∫∇²(1/r).dV = ∫∇(1/r).dS But I can't different (1/r) since the sphere contains the origin. I am wondering if there's any other way to tackle this.

You try to use this?

[tex]\nabla(\frac{1}{R})=\frac{\hat{R}}{R^{2}}[/tex]
 
yungman said:
You try to use this?

[tex]\nabla(\frac{1}{R})=\frac{\hat{R}}{R^{2}}[/tex]

How did you get this? I don't think I can differentiate it since the origin lies in the sphere, so the gradient of 1/0 can't happen.
 
[tex]\vec{R}=\hat{x}(x-x')+\hat{y}(y-y')+\hat{z}(z-z')[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{R}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{(x-x')^{2}+(y-y')^{2}+(z-z')^{2}}}\Rightarrow \nabla(\frac{1}{R}) = \hat{x}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial x}+\hat{y}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial y}+\hat{z}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial z}[/tex]

[tex]\nabla(\frac{1}{R}) = -\frac{\hat{x}(x-x')+\hat{y}(y-y')+\hat{z}(z-z')}{((x-x')^{2}+(y-y')^{2}+(z-z')^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}}} = -\frac{\hat{R}}{R^{2}}[/tex]

Yes this won't work at the origin. That is the reason usually problem specify not including origin. Origin is treated differently...something like Direc Delta function or something like that. I am not familiar with that.
 
yungman said:
[tex]\vec{R}=\hat{x}(x-x')+\hat{y}(y-y')+\hat{z}(z-z')[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{R}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{(x-x')^{2}+(y-y')^{2}+(z-z')^{2}}}\Rightarrow \nabla(\frac{1}{R}) = \hat{x}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial x}+\hat{y}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial y}+\hat{z}\frac{\partial \frac{1}{R}}{\partial z}[/tex]

[tex]\nabla(\frac{1}{R}) = -\frac{\hat{x}(x-x')+\hat{y}(y-y')+\hat{z}(z-z')}{((x-x')^{2}+(y-y')^{2}+(z-z')^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}}} = -\frac{\hat{R}}{R^{2}}[/tex]

Yes this won't work at the origin. That is the reason usually problem specify not including origin. Origin is treated differently...something like Direc Delta function or something like that. I am not familiar with that.

Oh ok thanks, that way is much more clear! I still don't know how I could possibly get -4Pi without differentiating (1/r), can anyone help on this please!
 
You aren't supposed to actually integrate the laplacian of 1/r over the interior of the sphere. You can't, it's not even defined at the origin. You are just supposed to show that integrating grad(1/r) over the surface of any sphere centered at the origin is -4*pi, as yungman said. That shows DEFINING laplacian of 1/r to be a dirac delta function at the origin makes sense in terms of Gauss' theorem. Note that laplacian of 1/r is equal to zero EXCEPT at the origin.
 
Dick said:
You aren't supposed to actually integrate the laplacian of 1/r over the interior of the sphere. You can't, it's not even defined at the origin. You are just supposed to show that integrating grad(1/r) over the surface of any sphere centered at the origin is -4*pi, as yungman said. That shows DEFINING laplacian of 1/r to be a dirac delta function at the origin makes sense in terms of Gauss' theorem. Note that laplacian of 1/r is equal to zero EXCEPT at the origin.

Oh right! so,

∫∇(1/r).δ(r-r).dS = ∫∇(1/r).dS

we know the dirac delta function will be 1, so now I can take the gradient of (1/r) and integrate it over the surface of the sphere to get -4Pi.

I'm confused as to what would happen if the dirac delta function is zero?
 
Just for future reference, here's a handy formula:

[tex]\vec{\nabla}= \hat{r}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial r} + \hat{\phi}\dfrac{1}{r}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\phi} + \hat{\theta}\dfrac{1}{r sin(\phi)}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta}[/tex]

You can just "multiply" this operator by whatever function you want to take the gradient of, and you'll be able to do it in spherical coordinates. You can see that in the case of a spherically symmetric function like [itex]\frac{1}{r}[/itex], only the first term matters, which makes things even easier.
 
hhhmortal said:
Oh right! so,

∫∇(1/r).δ(r-r).dS = ∫∇(1/r).dS

we know the dirac delta function will be 1, so now I can take the gradient of (1/r) and integrate it over the surface of the sphere to get -4Pi.

I'm confused as to what would happen if the dirac delta function is zero?

No, no, no, no. The delta function isn't in the surface integral, it's in the volume integral. You are supposed to show that the surface integral of grad(1/r) is the same as the volume integral of a 'laplacian' if you choose to define the 'laplacian' to be a delta function.
 
  • #10
I think you can assume that the origin is not on the surface of the sphere, so you can differentiate. And then just integrate.
([tex] dS=r^2\sin{\theta}d\theta d\phi[/tex])
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K