Electric Potential: Griffith's Electrodynamics Ch.2 Ex.7 Explained

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of electric potential due to a spherical shell as presented in Griffith's Electrodynamics, specifically in chapter 2, example 7. Participants are examining the signs associated with the electric field and the differential displacement in the context of potential calculation, exploring the implications of these signs on the interpretation of work done in bringing a charge from infinity to a point near the shell.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the product E.dr is taken as positive when E is radially outward and dr is radially inward, suggesting a potential inconsistency in the sign convention.
  • Another participant proposes that the correct interpretation of signs will lead to the 'correct' answer, noting that moving a positive charge towards a positive charge involves positive work against a repulsive force.
  • Several participants challenge the notion of the radial coordinate being inward pointing, asserting that the radial coordinate is conventionally positive as one moves away from the center.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of dr, with some asserting that dr points towards the center when moving a test charge inward, while others maintain that dr points in the direction of increasing r.
  • One participant explains that the negative sign in the integral arises from the limits of integration, emphasizing the importance of adhering to integration rules for unusual field arrangements.
  • A later reply clarifies that the direction of the radial displacement is determined by the sign of dr, which can vary depending on the direction of integration, and that the integral's result will reflect the chosen direction.
  • Another participant notes that potential is a scalar quantity, implying that the sign of the expression to be integrated is indeed determined by the sign of dr.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement on the interpretation of the signs associated with E and dr, with no consensus reached on the correct approach to the potential calculation. Multiple competing views remain regarding the definitions and conventions used in the derivation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include varying interpretations of the radial coordinate and the treatment of signs in the context of integration, which may depend on specific definitions or conventions not universally agreed upon.

Zubair Ahmad
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
In Griffith's electrodynamics chapter 2 example 7 he calculates potential due to a spherical shell outside it. Here E is radially outward while dr is radially inward as we are going towards the sphere hence E.dr should be negative but it is taken positive?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have a copy of that book to hand but it is pretty likely that, if you are strict about the signs in your interpretation of the derivation, the 'correct' answer will emerge. Lines pointing away from the centre implies a positive charge on the sphere and Potential is defined as the Work done in bringing a Posirive charge from infinity to a point. You would be moving a positive charge towards a positive charge and that would involve Positive Work against the repulsive force. That's what we would expect. I think.
 
Zubair Ahmad said:
Here E is radially outward while dr is radially inward
Hmm, are you sure about that? I have never seen an example where the radial coordinate is inward pointing. The radial coordinate is universally 0 at the center and increasingly positive as you go further away from the origin. I have never once seen a radial coordinate which is 0 at the center and increasingly negative as you go further away.
 
Dale said:
Hmm, are you sure about that? I have never seen an example where the radial coordinate is inward pointing. The radial coordinate is universally 0 at the center and increasingly positive as you go further away from the origin. I have never once seen a radial coordinate which is 0 at the center and increasingly negative as you go further away.
Doesn't dr points towards center as we move test charge towards the center? Thus dr is dr(-r^)
 
Zubair Ahmad said:
Doesn't dr points towards center as we move test charge towards the center? Thus dr is dr(-r^)
No, dr points in the direction of increasing r, by definition. If you are moving from large r to small r then that is reflected in your limits of integration.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zubair Ahmad
Zubair Ahmad said:
Doesn't dr points towards center as we move test charge towards the center? Thus dr is dr(-r^)
The negative sign comes in the limits of the integration process. The direction of dr is taken care of by how the integration is performed. In the case of the potential around a sphere, it's fairly obvious but you need to stick to the integration rules for unusual field arrangements.
 
Zubair Ahmad said:
Doesn't dr points towards center as we move test charge towards the center? Thus dr is dr(-r^)
According to the definition of ## d\vec{r} ## used by Griffith (he actually uses the notation ## d\vec{l} ## for the displacement vector)
## d\vec{r} =dr\hat{r} ## .
This is valid for the radial displacement only. In general there are two more terms, for the angular displacement in spherical coordinates.
So the direction of the radial displacement is given by the sign of dr. In general it can have any direction.
The electric field is given by ## \vec{E}=\frac{q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r} \hat{r} ##
So the term ##\vec{E} \cdot d \vec{r} ## is
##\frac{q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r} dr ## as the product of the radial unit vectors is 1.
So you don't need to add a minus sign. The sign of the expression to be integrated is determined by the sign of dr. It can be positive or negative, depending on the direction of the integration. You don't need to worry about it, the sign of the result of the integral will be the one corresponding to the chosen direction of integration.
In the book example the integral is from infinity to some finite value. So you will integrate a negative quantity and the result will be negative. And with the minus in front you get positive value of the potential.
 
nasu said:
The sign of the expression to be integrated is determined by the sign of dr.
I guess that's a fairly basic thing because Potential is a scalar.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
714
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
868
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K