D dimension scalar potential for point charge

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the scalar potential due to a point charge in a space with d dimensions. The original poster presents an equation for the potential and attempts to derive it from the electric field strength, raising questions about the presence of an extra factor in their result.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the derivation of the electric field strength and its relationship to the scalar potential, questioning the steps taken and the assumptions made regarding the dimensions involved. There is a focus on the mathematical manipulation of terms and the implications of summing over dimensions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants clarifying the mathematical steps involved and questioning the validity of certain conclusions drawn from the equations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the interpretation of the electric field components and their relationship to the overall magnitude.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of a homework problem, which may limit the information available and the assumptions that can be made about the physical setup.

babyEigenshep
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that with [itex]d[/itex] spatial dimensions the potential [itex]\phi[/itex] due to a point charge [itex]q[/itex] is given by
[tex]\phi (r) = \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2}-1)}{4\pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-2}}[/tex]


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



The electric field strength is known to be:
[tex]E(r) = \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}[/tex]
[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}})^2}[/tex]
[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{d}\sum_{i=1}^d(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}})^2}[/tex]
[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}})^2}[/tex]
Since the magnetic field will be the same in all directions, we know that
[tex]\vec {E}(r) = (\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}},\cdots)[/tex]
[tex]\phi(r) = -\int\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}dr[/tex]
[tex]\phi(r) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{1}{(d-2)}\frac{q}{r^{d-2}}[/tex]
[tex]\phi(r) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{1}{2(\frac{1}{2}d-1)}\frac{q}{r^{d-2}}[/tex]
[tex]\phi(r) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2}-1)}{4 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-2}}[/tex]

Why am I getting an extra [itex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}?[/itex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
babyEigenshep said:

The Attempt at a Solution



The electric field strength is known to be:

...

[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{d}\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

...

Why am I getting an extra [itex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}?[/itex]

How did you go the first equation above to the second? And also, what is it that you are summing over? You have the summation sign, but no [itex]i[/itex] index on any of your terms


PS: to get scalable parenthesis, use the command \left( and \right) between your work :wink:
 
How did you go the first equation above to the second?

The first equation is
[tex] E(r) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{d}\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

taking [itex]\frac{1}{d}[/itex] through the sum yields

[tex] E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\frac{1}{d} \left(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

which is the same as

[tex] E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\right)^2 \left(\frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

so we can collect it into 1 squared term

[tex] E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]

what is it that you are summing over?

I am summing over the dimensions. By definition of [itex]E(r)[/itex] as the magnitude of the electric field,
[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d \left. E_{x^i}\right. ^2[/tex]
where [itex]E_{x^i}[/itex] are the components of [itex]\vec{E}[/itex]
The sum is used with the fact that changing the order of the dimensions should not change the electric field to calculate the electric field from the magnitude.
 
Last edited:
babyEigenshep said:
so we can collect it into 1 squared term

[tex] E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}[/tex]
I am summing over the dimensions. By definition of [itex]E(r)[/itex] as the magnitude of the electric field,
[tex]E(r) = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d \left. E_{x^i}\right. ^2[/tex]
where [itex]E_{x^i}[/itex] are the components of [itex]\vec{E}[/itex]
The sum is used with the fact that changing the order of the dimensions should not change the electric field to calculate the electric field from the magnitude.

It almost looks like you are using this to argue that [tex]E_{x^i}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}[/itex]...but you can't really conclude this from the fact that [tex]\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}= \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d \left. E_{x^i}\right. ^2}[/itex] any more than you can conclude that 2=1, 2=2 and 2=3 from the fact that [itex]1+2+3=2+2+2[/itex][/tex][/tex]
 
gabbagabbahey said:
It almost looks like you are using this to argue that [tex]E_{x^i}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}[/itex]...but you can't really conclude this from the fact that [tex]\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}{2 \pi^{d/2}}\frac{q}{r^{d-1}}\right)^2}= \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d \left. E_{x^i}\right. ^2}[/itex] any more than you can conclude that 2=1, 2=2 and 2=3 from the fact that [itex]1+2+3=2+2+2[/itex][/tex][/tex]
[tex][tex] <br /> That was indeed what I was trying to argue. I feel quite silly now. Thankyou for your help[/tex][/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K