Components of an Electric field due to a dipole

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the components of the electric field \(\vec{E}\) due to an electric dipole at distant points, specifically the expressions for \(E_x\) and \(E_z\). The original poster presents equations for these components and attempts to simplify them, encountering difficulties in the process.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to break down the electric field into vector components but finds the calculations complex and unwieldy.
  • Some participants suggest considering the assumption that the distance to the field point is much greater than the dipole length, which could simplify the analysis.
  • Others question how this assumption aids in the simplification of the problem.
  • There are discussions about the appropriateness of using Cartesian versus polar coordinates for the calculations.
  • One participant proposes starting from the potential \(V\) instead of the electric field to facilitate the derivation of \(E\).

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various approaches being explored. Some participants have provided insights on simplifying the expressions, while others are still grappling with the calculations. There is no explicit consensus on the best method to proceed, but several productive ideas have been shared.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of the problem, including potential assumptions about distances and coordinate systems. The original poster expresses frustration with the calculations, indicating a challenging problem context.

forensics409
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The problem is: Show that the components of [tex]\vec{E}[/tex] due to a dipole are given at distant points, by Ex=[tex]\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon{o}}[/tex] [tex]\frac{3pxz}{(x^2+z^2)^{5/2}}[/tex] and Ez=[tex]\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon{o}}[/tex] [tex]\frac{p(2z^2-x^2)}{(x^2+z^2)^(\frac{5}{2})}}[/tex]


http://physweb.bgu.ac.il/COURSES/PHYSICS2_B/2009A/homework/Homework-2_files/image006.jpg

Homework Equations



E=[tex]\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon{o}}[/tex] [tex]\frac{Q}{r^2}[/tex]
p=qd

The Attempt at a Solution



I have tried to break the fields of each one into vector components and add the components, however, it got really messy really quickly and after simplifying it a bit i got a ridiculous equation for just the x component, i had no clue where to go and gave up on even try to get the z component.

Ex=[tex]\frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon{o}}[/tex][tex]\frac{(x^2+(z+\frac{d}{2})^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}}-(x^2+(z-\frac{d}{2})^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}}}{((x^{2}+z^{2})^{2} + (\frac{d^{2}x^{2}}{2}-\frac{d^{2}z^{2}}{2}+\frac{d^4}{16}))^{\frac{3}{2}}}[/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I haven't checked your expression, but the key thing to notice here is that you are asked to find [itex]E_x[/itex] and [itex]E_z[/itex] at distant points. To me, that means you should assume that the distance to the field point from the center of the dipole is much greater than the length of the dipole, or

[tex]\frac{d}{\sqrt{x^2+z^2}}\ll 1[/tex]
 
But how does that help?
 
forensics409 said:
But how does that help?

Well, looking at the denominator of your expression; if you factor out an [tex](x^2+z^2)^3[/itex], you're left with [tex](1+\text{some stuff})^{3/2}[/itex]. It shouldn't take you much effort to show that the "some stuff" is much smaller than one at distant points, and so your denominator is approximately just [tex](x^2+z^2)^3[/itex].[/tex][/tex][/tex]
 
Ok. but my biggest problem is then simplifying the numerator, and I tried using binomial expansion for that and you get (x[tex]^{2}[/tex]+z[tex]^{2}[/tex]+dz)[tex]^{3/2}[/tex] - (x[tex]^{2}[/tex]+z[tex]^{2}[/tex]-dz)[tex]^{3/2}[/tex] and a denominator of (x[tex]^{2}[/tex] + z[tex]^{2}[/tex])[tex]^{3}[/tex]

sorry to ask but what do you do from there?
 
To be honest, your expression just doesn't look right to me. And I think you are making the calculations more difficult than they need to be by working in Cartesian coordinates.

If I were you, I'd redo your calculation using polar coordinates, [itex]x=r\cos\theta[/itex] and [itex]z=r\sin\theta[/itex]. The advantage of this is that your "at distant points" approximation simply means that [itex]\frac{d}{r}\ll 1[/itex], and so writing your expression in terms of the dimensionless variable [itex]\eta\equiv\frac{d}{r}[/itex], you'll only need to Taylor expand it around the point [itex]\eta=0[/itex] and keep terms up to first order.
 
actually, doing the whole thing from the electric field is ridiculously stupid. I realized I should start it in Volts so it looks like this

V = [tex]\frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon}[/tex] ([tex]\frac{1}{r-\frac{l}{2}cos\vartheta}[/tex]-[tex]\frac{1}{r+\frac{l}{2}cos\vartheta}[/tex]) which then simplifies to V=[tex]\frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon}[/tex][tex]\frac{lcos\vartheta}{r^2}[/tex]

V=[tex]\frac{pz}{(r^3)4\pi\epsilon}[/tex]

then -[tex]\nabla[/tex]V=E so then you just take the partial derivatives of it in terms of x and z.

I feel stupid for not thinking of it sooner
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K