Electric field vector & surface integral

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of an electric field vector and the corresponding surface integral, specifically in the context of Cartesian coordinates and the application of the divergence theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the expression of the electric field in Cartesian coordinates and question the notation used for the electric field vector. There is discussion about evaluating the surface integral and the divergence theorem's applicability to the problem. Some participants express confusion regarding the correct interpretation of the electric field vector and its components.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the notation and the mathematical expressions involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the need to evaluate the surface integral explicitly, while others are still seeking clarification on specific aspects of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of differing conventions in notation among participants, and the problem specifically asks for the flux through one face of a cube, which may affect the approach taken. The original poster has attached figures that are referenced but not visible in the text.

jegues
Messages
1,085
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



See figure attached.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



See figure attached.

The solution shows that,

[itex]\vec{r} = x \hat{i} + y \hat{j} + z \hat{k}[/itex]

How did they obtain this?
 

Attachments

  • Q1.5A.jpg
    Q1.5A.jpg
    17.9 KB · Views: 483
  • AT1.5A.jpg
    AT1.5A.jpg
    41.5 KB · Views: 527
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all, you did not write correctly the expression of the electric field in Cartesian coordinates. (Remember that |r| is not -usually- equals to 1)

Then, how do you usually evaluate the surface integral (the flux) over a certain surface?
 
DiracRules said:
First of all, you did not write correctly the expression of the electric field in Cartesian coordinates. (Remember that |r| is not -usually- equals to 1)

Then, how do you usually evaluate the surface integral (the flux) over a certain surface?

It's not a vector, it's a unit vector, that's what the hat signifies.

For the flux since it's a closed surface I can apply divergence theorem,

[itex]\oint_{S} \vec{F} \cdot \hat{n}dS = \int\int\int_{V}\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{F}dV[/itex]

I'm still confused as how to get [itex]\vec{r}[/itex].
 
Bump, still looking for some help on this one!
 
Sorry for misunderstanding r, but everyone has his own conventions and symbols :D

In Cartesian coordinates, how do you write the position occupied by an object? By giving the three coordinates. You can write both [itex]\vec{r}_P=\left[\begin{array}{c}x\\y\\z\end{array}\right][/itex] and [itex]\vec{r}_P=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}[/itex] since[itex]\left[\begin{array}{c}x\\y\\z\end{array}\right]=x\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\\0\end{array}\right]+y\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\1\\0\end{array}\right]+z\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\0\\1\end{array}\right][/itex]

Was this your problem?

Now, I think that for the first part of the question you cannot use the flux theorem because the problem asks to calculate the flux through one face of the cube, not through the whole surface: I fear you need to calculate explicitly the flux by evaluating the surface integral or something like that (it shouldn't be too difficult, however).
You'd better express the electric field in term of its cartesian components and then try to integrate.
 
DiracRules said:
Sorry for misunderstanding r, but everyone has his own conventions and symbols :D

In Cartesian coordinates, how do you write the position occupied by an object? By giving the three coordinates. You can write both [itex]\vec{r}_P=\left[\begin{array}{c}x\\y\\z\end{array}\right][/itex] and [itex]\vec{r}_P=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}[/itex] since[itex]\left[\begin{array}{c}x\\y\\z\end{array}\right]=x\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\\0\end{array}\right]+y\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\1\\0\end{array}\right]+z\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\0\\1\end{array}\right][/itex]

Was this your problem?

Now, I think that for the first part of the question you cannot use the flux theorem because the problem asks to calculate the flux through one face of the cube, not through the whole surface: I fear you need to calculate explicitly the flux by evaluating the surface integral or something like that (it shouldn't be too difficult, however).
You'd better express the electric field in term of its cartesian components and then try to integrate.

So for the first part of the question, "Express the electric field vector in its rectangular coordinate components" does this have any significance with the cube at all?

The electric field vector is going to generate a radial vector field from the point charge outward everywhere in space.

The radius depends on which point in space you are observing (i.e. any point (x,y,z)).

Thus,

[itex]\vec{E} = \frac{q \vec{r}}{4\pi \epsilon_{o}r^{3}}[/itex]

Where,

[tex]\vec{r} = x\hat{i} + y\hat{j} + z\hat{k} \quad \text{Giving,} \quad r = \sqrt{x^{2} + y^{2} + z^{2}}[/tex]

I'm moving onto the cube portion now, I'll post my results.
 
Here's what I've got so far, can't remember how to evaluate such an integral,
 

Attachments

  • AT1.5a.JPG
    AT1.5a.JPG
    47.9 KB · Views: 506
I think it is right.

To evaluate the integral, you can use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_integrals_of_irrational_functions" > List of integrals involving [itex]R=\sqrt{ax^2+bx+c}[/itex] > [itex]\int \frac{dx}{R^3}[/itex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DiracRules said:
I think it is right.

To evaluate the integral, you can use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_integrals_of_irrational_functions" > List of integrals involving [itex]R=\sqrt{ax^2+bx+c}[/itex] > [itex]\int \frac{dx}{R^3}[/itex]

How would I do that? I don't have

[itex]ax^{2} + bx + c[/itex], we would be missing the term with the b cofficient.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
put b=0 :D
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K