Electricity and Magnetism: Verifying the Inverse Square Law

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter giodude
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse square law
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around verifying the inverse square law in the context of electricity and magnetism, specifically through a problem presented in the Purcell and Morin textbook. Participants explore the derivation of the Coulomb field of a static point charge and the implications of spherical symmetry in this verification process.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how their solution verifies the inverse square law, indicating a need for clarification on the problem's implications.
  • Another participant notes the complexity introduced by the pedagogical approach of the textbook, suggesting that the problem could be simpler due to the spherical symmetry of the situation.
  • A detailed mathematical approach is presented, where a participant outlines the use of Gauss's Law and spherical symmetry to derive the electric field of a point charge, leading to the conclusion that the electric field behaves according to the inverse square law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the clarity of the problem's verification process. While one participant provides a mathematical derivation supporting the inverse square law, another expresses confusion, indicating that multiple interpretations or understandings of the problem may exist.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the pedagogical approach of the textbook, as well as the assumptions made regarding spherical symmetry and the singularity at the origin when dealing with point charges.

giodude
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Hello,

I'm currently working through Purcell and Morin, Electricity and Magnetism textbook and came across a problem in which the goal is to verify the inverse square law. I'm worked through and completed the problem. However, I'm confused how this verifies the inverse square law, I'm posting the images of the solution below.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The attached files are not in .pdf format.
How were they produced ?
 
I took images of them on my phone and then airdropped them to my laptop, I'll fix them up when I get back to my laptop and edit the post. Thank you.
 
I've here the 3rd edition, where it seems that the authors try to derive the Coulomb field of a static point charge. As to be expected from this book, it's all buried in some strange pedagogics, making the problem more complicated than it is.

The idea is simply to use the spherical symmetry of the problem. So let the point charge, ##Q##, sit at rest in the origin of a Cartesian coordinate system. We want to calculate ##\vec{E}(\vec{r})## at any position ##\vec{r} \neq \vec{0}##, because at the origin we have obviously a singularity, which is characteristic for the assumption of a "point charge" in classical field theory.

Mathematically the problem is simple because of spherical symmetry. There's no other vector in the problem than ##\vec{r}##, because no direction is in any way special except the direction of the position vector itself. Thus you can make the Ansatz
$$\vec{E} = E_r \vec{e}_r,$$
where ##\vec{e}_r=\vec{r}/r##. The "radial component" ##E_r## can only depend on ##r=|\vec{r}|##, again due to the spherical symmetry.

Now you simply use Gauss's Law in integral form
$$\int_{\partial V} \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{f} \cdot \vec{E}=Q_V/\epsilon_0.$$
It's obvious, again because of the spherical symmetry, to choose a spherical shell of radius ##r## around the origin for ##\partial V##. The surface-normal vectors are ##\vec{e}_r## and thus with our ansatz for ##\vec{E}##
$$E_r (r) 4 \ pi r^2=Q/\epsilon_0 \; \Rightarrow \; E_r(r)=\frac{Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r^2}.$$
That's it! It's simply spherical symmetry and Gauss's Law!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K