Doubt regarding derivation of bound charges in dielectric

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the derivation of bound charges in dielectrics as presented in Griffiths, specifically using the formula for dipoles. The potential V(r) is expressed through an integral involving polarization P and the distance between points r and r'. There is a query regarding the representation of the gradient operator ∇' in the context of the formula, questioning whether it should be expressed as (1/X^2) in the direction of the unit vector. The suggestion is made to clarify the derivation by employing Cartesian coordinates for better understanding. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for precision in the mathematical representation of the derivation process.
nuclear_dog
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
In Griffiths, for deriving the bound charges for a given polarization P , the formula used is the general formula for dipoles .i.e ( equation 4.9)
{Here the potential at r is calculated due to the dipole at r' )

V(r) = ∫\frac{x.P(r')}{X^2}d\tau'

Here X = r - r' , and x = unit vector in the direction of X

Then it is written that \frac{x}{X^2} = \nabla'(1/X).

since X = (r-r') , and ∇' = (∂/∂r')\widehat{r'} ...

Shouldn't ∇'(1/X) be (1/X^2)\widehat{r'} ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It might be best to work it out in Cartesian coordinates where all coordinates are written explicitly. See if you can fill in the details of the derivation outlined in the figure.
 

Attachments

  • gradient 1_r.JPG
    gradient 1_r.JPG
    16.7 KB · Views: 475
Last edited:
Thanks , I can see that in Cartesian coordinates .
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top