Another trig question relate to retarded potential

  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential Trig
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the potential of radiating dipoles as described in Griffiths' textbook. The equation for the potential is presented, highlighting conditions where d is much smaller than η and c/ω. A key point of contention is understanding why the cosine term becomes negligible when η is much larger than c/ω. The explanation provided suggests that since both sine and cosine functions are bounded by ±1, the sine term dominates, leading to the conclusion that the cosine term effectively disappears. This simplification is affirmed as a straightforward reasoning in the context of the problem.
yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
294
This is from Griffiths page 446.

In radiating dipoles:

V(\vec r,t)=\frac 1 {4\pi \epsilon_0} \left [ \frac {q_0 cos [\omega(t- \frac {\eta_+} c )]}{\eta_+}- \frac {q_0 cos [\omega(t- \frac {\eta_- } c)]}{\eta_-} \right ]

Given conditions d<< \eta\; and d<< \frac c {\omega} :

V_{(\eta,\theta,t)} = \frac {q_0 d cos \theta}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r} \left [ -\frac {\omega}{c} sin[\omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c}]+\frac 1 {\eta} cos[\omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c}]\right ]

But then the book claimed if \eta >> \frac c {\omega}\;, then:V_{(\eta,\theta,t)} = \frac {q_0 d cos \theta}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r} \left [ -\frac {\omega}{c} sin[ \omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c} ] \right ] = -\frac {q_0\; d\;\omega\; cos \theta}{4\pi \epsilon_0 c\; r} sin[ \omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c} ]I don't see why if \eta >> \frac c {\omega}\;, then

\frac 1 {\eta} cos[\omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c}] = 0

It look so simple but I just don't see it. Please explain to me.

Thanks

Alan
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I have the answer, it is very simple if I am correct:

V_{(\eta,\theta,t)} = \frac {q_0 d cos \theta}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r} \left [ -\frac {\omega}{c} sin[\omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c}]+\frac 1 {\eta} cos[\omega(t-\frac {\eta}{c}]\right ]Since both the sine and cosine max out at +/-1, so if \eta >> \frac c {\omega}\;, then The first term with the sine function is much larger than the second term with cosine term. So the second term just disappeared. Tell me whether I am correct. It's just that simple!
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top