1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Electric Field from a Finite Length, Uniformly Charged Wire (EM, not Gen Phys II)

  1. Sep 28, 2012 #1
    So there's this situation going on:
    http://imageshack.us/a/img826/7398/physicsforums.png [Broken]

    Going from the definition of an electric field:
    (1) [itex]\vec{E} ( \vec{x} ) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} ∫ \frac{\vec{x} - \vec{x'}}{| \vec{x} - \vec{x'} | ^3} ρ( \vec{x'}) d^3x'[/itex]

    (2) The [itex]ρ(\vec{x'})d^3x'[/itex] reduces to [itex]λdz'[/itex]. And [itex]\vec{x} - \vec{x'} = x \hat{i} - z' \hat{k} = \sqrt{x^2 + z'^{2}}[/itex].

    (3) Now, plugging this information into the electric field equation yields:
    [itex]\vec{E} ( \vec{x} ) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \int^{l}_{-l} \frac{\sqrt{x^2 + z'^{2}}}{(\sqrt{x^2 + z'^{2}})^3} λdz'[/itex]

    (4) However, the book (Electromagnetism by Pollack and Stump) shows:
    [itex]E_{x}(x,0,0) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \int^{l}_{-l} \frac{x}{(\sqrt{x^2 + z'^{2}})^3} λdz' [/itex]

    How do we get from (3) to (4)? Why is z' only removed from the numerator?

    Thanks in advance.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 28, 2012 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2017 Award

    Your formula (3) is obviously wrong, because on the left-hand side is a vector and on the right-hand side a scalar quantity.

    From (1) and (2) you immediately write down (4). So your book is correct. There is no z' in the numerator of the x component!
  4. Sep 28, 2012 #3
    so the charged wire is along z axis so by symmetry only x component will survive so
    z will be absent in numerator and beware it is a vector.
  5. Sep 29, 2012 #4
    I don't understand how I could just go from (1) and (2) to (4)...

    Or why the numerator doesn't have a vector magnitude, whereas the demoninator does...

    I was, however, able to get the correct answer, just not using the full notation from equation (1).

    So I start with: [itex]\vec{E} ( \vec{x} ) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} ∫ \frac{\vec{x} - \vec{x'}}{| \vec{x} - \vec{x'} | ^3} ρ( \vec{x'}) d^3x'[/itex]

    And since [itex]d\vec{E}[/itex] generated by [itex]dq[/itex] on the line will be symmetric (i.e. only the x-component will survive), we can say [itex]dE_{x} = d\vec{E}cos(\theta)[/itex].

    Therefore: [itex]dE = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \frac{1}{r^2} dq[/itex], where [itex]r = | \vec{x} - \vec{x'}| = \sqrt{x^2 + z'^2}[/itex]

    Therefore: [itex]dE_{x} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \frac{1}{x^2 + z'^2} \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2 + z'^2}} λdz' [/itex] from [itex]cos(\theta) = \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2 + z'^2}} [/itex] and [itex] dq = λdz'[/itex]

    Which gives the result in the book: [itex]E_{x}(x,0,0) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \int^{l}_{-l} \frac{x}{(\sqrt{x^2 + z'^{2}})^3} λdz' [/itex].

    So was I supposed to recognize that I needed to use the cos(θ) relationship from the beginning? I'm also still confused on how the vector difference only acts on the denominator, if I were to just use equation (1).

    Thank in advance.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook