Deriving Quadrapole Expansion of Charge Distribution

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the quadrupole expansion of a charge distribution, specifically the potential associated with a quadrupole moment. Participants explore the mathematical expressions involved and seek clarification on the notation and concepts used in the derivation, including coordinate-free representations and the properties of the Kronecker delta.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the integral expression for the potential and the quadrupole term, seeking clarification on the steps leading to a coordinate-free equation.
  • Another participant explains that the expressions involving the dot product are simply definitions and that the summation notation is a shorthand for representing these relationships in a coordinate-free manner.
  • There is a discussion about the meaning of the Kronecker delta, with a participant noting its role in simplifying the terms when indices are equal or not.
  • Some participants express confusion about the notation and whether it complicates understanding, while others affirm that it is a standard representation in physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions and properties of the dot product and the Kronecker delta. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the clarity of the notation and its implications for understanding the quadrupole expansion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the potential for confusion arising from the use of summation notation and coordinate-free expressions, as well as the assumptions underlying the mathematical representations. No specific mathematical steps are resolved, and the implications of the notation remain a point of contention.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and practitioners in physics and engineering who are studying electrostatics, particularly those interested in multipole expansions and mathematical representations of physical concepts.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
[tex]V=\frac 1 {4\pi\epsilon_0}\int \frac {\rho(\vec r\;')}{\eta} \;d\;\tau'\;\hbox{ where }\; \vec{\eta} = \vec r - \vec r\;'[/tex]

[itex]\vec r\;[/itex] is the position vector of the field point and [itex]\;\vec r\;'\;[/itex] is the position vector of the source point.

Using multiple expansion, the quadrapole term of potential

[tex]V_{QUAD} = \frac 1 {4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac 1 {2r^3}\int(r\;')^n(3\;cos^2\theta'-1)\rho(\vec r\;')d\tau'[/tex]

The book go on to derive [itex]V_{QUAD}[/itex] into coordinate free equation and I am lost. Please explain to me how the steps work:

The book claimed

[tex]V_{QUAD}= \frac 1 {4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac 1 {2\; r^3} \sum ^{3}_{i,j=1}\left [ \hat r_i \hat r_j \int[3r'_i r'_j -(r')^2\delta_{ij}]\rho(\vec r\;')d\;\tau'\right ]\;=\;\frac 1 {4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac 1 {2\; r^3} \left [ 3 \sum ^{3}_{i=1} \hat r_i r'_i \sum^3_{j=1} \sum^3_{j=1} \;=\; (r')^2\sum_{ij}\hat r_i\hat r_j \delta_{ij}\right]\rho(\vec r') \;d \;\tau'[/tex]

[tex]\hbox{ Where }\; \delta _{ij} = \; \begin{array}{cc} 1 & i=j \\ 0 & i \neq j \end{array}[/tex]

[tex]\sum ^{3}_{i=1} \hat r_i r'_i =\hat r \cdot \vec r\;' = r'cos\theta' = \sum ^{3}_{j=1} \hat r_j r'_j \;\hbox{ and }\;\sum_{i,j} \hat r_i \hat r_j \delta_{ij} = \sum \hat r_j \hat r_j = \hat r \cdot \hat r =1[/tex]

Can anyone explain:
[tex]\sum ^{3}_{i=1} \hat r_i r'_i =\hat r \cdot \vec r\;' = r'cos\theta' = \sum ^{3}_{j=1} \hat r_j r'_j[/tex]

and

[tex]\sum \hat r_j \hat r_j = \hat r \cdot \hat r =1[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


yungman said:
Can anyone explain:
[tex]\sum ^{3}_{i=1} \hat r_i r'_i =\hat r \cdot \vec r\;' = r'cos\theta' = \sum ^{3}_{j=1} \hat r_j r'_j[/tex]

and

[tex]\sum \hat r_j \hat r_j = \hat r \cdot \hat r =1[/tex]


The first is just the definition of the dot product. i.e.:

[tex]\vec{A}\cdot\vec{B}=A_1B_1+A_2B_2+A_3B_3=\sum_{i=1}^3A_iB_i=ABcos\theta[/tex]

The components are just numbered instead of lettered. A_1=A_x, and so on.

The second is just the dot product of a unit vector with itself. By definition, that is 1.
 


G01 said:
The first is just the definition of the dot product. i.e.:

[tex]\vec{A}\cdot\vec{B}=A_1B_1+A_2B_2+A_3B_3=\sum_{i=1}^3A_iB_i=ABcos\theta[/tex]


The components are just numbered instead of lettered. A_1=A_x, and so on.

The second is just the dot product of a unit vector with itself. By definition, that is 1.

Thanks for your time.

Is that just mean both A and B are 3 space vector? Just that simple?! And they have to use the [itex]\sum_1^3[/itex] to confuse me?!
 


yungman said:
Thanks for your time.

Is that just mean both A and B are 3 space vector? Just that simple?! And they have to use the [itex]\sum_1^3[/itex] to confuse me?!

Yes, that's it. The point is that this notation is "coordinate free." It doesn't matter how you define your three orthogonal axes, the expression for the quadrupole potential in coordinate free notation will always look like this.

Using summation notation in this case, is just shorthand.

The Kroneker delta, [itex]\delta_{ij}[/itex] just means that when i and j are not equal, that term does not contribute, since [itex]\delta_{ij}=0[/itex] for [itex]i\not=j[/itex] and [itex]\delta_{ij}=1[/itex] for [itex]i=j[/itex].
 


G01 said:
Yes, that's it. The point is that this notation is "coordinate free." It doesn't matter how you define your three orthogonal axes, the expression for the quadrupole potential in coordinate free notation will always look like this.

Using summation notation in this case, is just shorthand.

The Kroneker delta, [itex]\delta_{ij}[/itex] just means that when i and j are not equal, that term does not contribute, since [itex]\delta_{ij}=0[/itex] for [itex]i\not=j[/itex] and [itex]\delta_{ij}=1[/itex] for [itex]i=j[/itex].

Thanks

I understand

[tex]\sum^3_{i=1}\vec r_i \vec r'_i = \vec r \cdot \vec r\;'[/tex]What is [tex]\sum ^3_{i,j=1} \hat r_i \hat r_j[/tex]?
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K