Electric field and Legendre Polynomials

Observer Two
Messages
24
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I want to varify that the components of a homogenous electric field in spherical coordinates \vec{E} = E_r \vec{e}_r + E_{\theta} \vec{e}_{\theta} + E_{\varphi} \vec{e}_{\varphi} are given via:

E_r = - \sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty (l+1) [a_{l+1}r^l P_{l+1}(cos \theta) - b_l r^{-(l+2)} P_l cos(\theta)]

E_{\theta} = \sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty [a_{l+1}r^l + b_{l+1} r^{-(l+3)}]sin(\theta)P'_{l+1}(cos \theta)

E_{\varphi} = 0

I have rotational symmetry about the z-axis (azimuthal symmetry).

Homework Equations



I know that the potential in charge-free space and with azimuthal symmetry can be given via the Legendre Polynomials:

\Phi(r, \theta) = \sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty (a_l r^l + b_l r^{-(l+1)}) P_l(cos \theta)

The Attempt at a Solution



Let's begin with E_r.

\vec{E} \vec{e}_r = E_r

And:

\vec{E} = - \nabla \Phi

So basically what I have to do is apply the gradient (in spherical coordinates) and multiply with \vec{e}_r. In other words: Apply the \vec{e}_r component of the gradient to the potential. Is this correct? If so: How exactly do I apply the gradient to a sum like (2)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Observer Two said:
In other words: Apply the \vec{e}_r component of the gradient to the potential. Is this correct?
Not quite. First write out the representation of the gradient operator in spherical coordinates and apply it to your ##\Phi##.

Does that get you any further?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top