Calculating the Potential using Laplaces Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter zerakith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the electric potential inside a uniformly charged sphere using Laplace's equation. The original poster attempts to prove that the potential inside the sphere is given by a specific formula, while also exploring the implications of integrating the Laplacian in spherical coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster discusses using the Laplacian in spherical coordinates and considers symmetry arguments. They express confusion regarding the integration process and the treatment of constants during integration. Other participants question the appropriateness of certain terms in the potential and suggest applying limits to integrals for clarity.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring different interpretations of the integration process and the implications of boundary conditions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the treatment of constants and the necessity of applying limits to integrals, which may help clarify the original poster's confusion.

Contextual Notes

There is a discussion about the physical implications of certain terms in the potential, particularly regarding the behavior at the center of the sphere. The original poster also reflects on the distinction between definite and indefinite integrals in the context of boundary conditions.

zerakith
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
1. The question asks to prove that for a sphere (radius R) of constant charge density, [tex]\rho[/tex], the potential inside the sphere is [tex]\Phi=\frac{\rho}{6\varepsilon_0}(3R^2-r^2)[/tex]


Homework Equations



[tex]\nabla^2\Phi=0[/tex]
[tex]\nabla^2\Phi=\frac{-\rho}{\varepsilon_0}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


This should be relatively simple. Use the expression for the Laplacian in Spherical Polar Coodinates:
[tex]\nabla^2\Phi=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^2\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial r}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2\sin{\theta}}\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}\left(\sin{\theta}\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial \theta}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2\sin^2{\theta}}\frac{ \partial^2 \Phi}{\partial \phi^2}[/tex]
Make symmetry arguments to say that only the first term is non-zero. Thus:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^2\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial r}\right)=0[/tex]
Here comes my issue, which can be broken down into two parts. Firstly, is
[tex]\int f(x)dx\equiv\int_a^x f(x')dx'[/tex]
If not when would you use each?
Secondly, no matter which method i choose i just can not get it to come out, i know the potential is right and can, weirdly, get there by finding the Electric field first but the question asks you explicitly to solve it using the laplacian. Here is the working:
[tex]\Phi_\text{outside}=\frac{\rho a^3}{3\varepsilon_0r}[/tex]
Which arises from the solution to the laplacian and the condition that the sphere must appear as a point charge as r tends to infinity.
[tex]\frac{d\left(r^2\frac{d\Phi_\text{Inside}}{dr} \right)}{dr}=-\frac{\rho r^2}{\varepsilon_0}[/tex]
[tex]\left(r^2\frac{d\Phi_\text{Inside}}{dr}\right)=-\int\frac{\rho r^2}{\varepsilon_0}dr[/tex]
[tex]\left(r^2\frac{d\Phi_\text{Inside}}{dr}\right)= \frac{ \rho r^3}{3\varepsilon_0}+D[/tex]
[tex]\frac{d\Phi_\text{Inside}}{dr}=\frac{ \rho r}{3\varepsilon_0}+\frac{D}{r^2}[/tex]
[tex]\Phi_\text{Inside}= \frac{ \rho r^2}{6\varepsilon_0}-\frac{D}{r}+E[/tex]
Then we know we need phi to be continuous so the potential inside must be equivalent to potential outside at the radius of the sphere. This leads to [tex]D=\frac{-\rho a^3}{12\varepsilon_0}[/tex],[tex]E=\frac{\rho a^2}{12\varepsilon_0}[/tex]. Which is not correct. I cannot see my mistake and have tried this in several way and not managed it either.
Thanks in advance,
Zerakith
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't have a 1/r term for the potential inside the sphere because it will go to infinity at the center of the sphere. If you integrate from 0 to r instead of just taking an indefinite integral you will see the D/r term goes away.
 
Am I right in saying that i could simply say D is 0 for physical reasons (i.e the one you described). Also I tried putting the limits as 0 and r if I apply those limits on the two integrations i get simply that:
[tex]\Phi_\text{inside}=\frac{-\rho r^2}{6 \varepsilon_0}[/tex]
If I only apply it to the first integration, i do indeed get the right answer, I am confused as to why you would use one integration with limits and one without. Also, I was under the vague impression that since the integration with limits in not a definite integral it was equivalent to the indefinite integral (when boundary conditions are applied), am I wrong in this?

Thankyou for the Help,
Zerakith
 
You should to apply limits to both integrals. When you integrate a second time, you will get a [tex]\phi(0)[/tex] term. This is your arbitrary constant and you can find it from the boundary condition [tex]\phi_{in} = \phi_{out}[/tex]. If you do this you will recover the answer given.

You can discard the D/r term on physical grounds, yes. In fact, you can consider this as one of your boundary conditions. If you apply this boundary condition it is equivalent to doing the first integral as a definite integral. Yes, simply doing the second integral as an indefinite integral and applying the boundary conditions will give you the right answer, but I think you lose a little physical insight.
 
Ah I understand my error now. Thankyou very much!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K