A Doubt Regarding Quantization of charge ,its relevance in integration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the justification for using infinitesimal charge elements (dq) in calculations despite the quantization of charge, where the smallest unit is the elementary charge (e). It is argued that in systems with a very large number of charges (N approaching infinity), the discrete nature of charge becomes negligible, allowing for the use of integrals instead of sums. This approximation is commonly employed in statistical mechanics and simplifies calculations involving potential energy and charge distributions. The error introduced by treating dq as continuous diminishes as N increases, making it a practical approach. Thus, while fractional charges do not exist, the method of integration remains valid in the context of large charge systems.
Uday
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
a) We know that the smallest charge that can exist is 'e' . But in several instances (such as calculating potential energy of sphere of charge ) we consider 'dq' and then integrate it . How can we justify this ?

b) We know that 1/2 or 1/3 of e (charge of electron) doesn't exist . But integration is a process in which we add every fraction in the limits of integration which should be an error in the case of integration of charges . So should we use a different method for adding up ( in uniform distribution of charges ) ?
PLZ HELP ... and thanks for spending ur valuable time reading this ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If we have a system consisting of ##N \rightarrow \infty ## charges then we can treat the system as continuous to an extremely good approximation and perform integrals instead of extremely large sums. The error in the integral due to the discreteness of charge will be vanishingly small as ##N \rightarrow \infty ##. If you've taken statistical mechanics then you most likely used this approximation method over and over when calculating partition functions for various systems with many degrees of freedom. We're doing the same thing here.
 
WannabeNewton said:
If we have a system consisting of ##N \rightarrow \infty ## charges then we can treat the system as continuous to an extremely good approximation and perform integrals instead of extremely large sums. The error in the integral due to the discreteness of charge will be vanishingly small as ##N \rightarrow \infty ##. If you've taken statistical mechanics then you most likely used this approximation method over and over when calculating partition functions for various systems with many degrees of freedom. We're doing the same thing here.

can we talk about dq charge?
 
Consider a system of ##N## charges, all of charge ##q##, such that ##N \gg 1##. If I add another charge ##q## to this collection then the new total charge will just be ##Q = q(N + 1)## but ##N \gg 1## so compared to ##qN## the new charge ##q## is so small, i.e. ##q \ll qN##, that we can just treat ##q## as an infinitesimal amount of charge ##dq## and the error in this approximation will get smaller and smaller as ##N \rightarrow \infty##.

So physically no there isn't ##dq## amount of a charge but if we have ##N \rightarrow \infty## amount of charges in a system then adding a new charge ##q## will add such a fantanstically small amount of charge to the total charge of the system that we may as well treat ##q## as an infinitesimal ##dq## and use integration, which is computationally much simpler to work with than sums of Coulomb forces between an extremely large number of charges.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top