Electrostatic potential due to a dipole

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the electrostatic potential due to a dipole, specifically focusing on the geometric derivation of equations related to distances and angles in the context of dipole fields.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the geometric derivation of equations involving distances (r1, r) and angles (theta, alpha) related to a dipole. Questions arise regarding the use of vector addition versus geometric methods, and the presence of positive and negative signs in the equations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active with participants questioning the derivation of equations and the rationale behind the signs in the terms. Some participants express confusion about the definitions of angles and the relationships between the equations presented in the book.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a diagram that is referenced but not provided, leading to some uncertainty about the angles involved. The discussion also highlights the reliance on the cosine rule and the implications of angle definitions in the context of the dipole's orientation.

Crystal037
Messages
167
Reaction score
7
Homework Statement
Find the electrostatic potential due to a dipole
Relevant Equations
V=Q/4*pi*ebselon
IMG_20191209_042703_compress65.jpg

Given here is that by geometry
r1^2 =r^2 +a^2 - 2ar*cos(theta)
But if we try to do vector addition then since direction of dipole is upwards then it should be
r^2 =r1^2 +a^2 + 2ar1*cos(alpha)
Where alpha is the angle between a and r1. I Don,'t understand how they get it by geometry
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Crystal037 said:
if we try to do vector addition then since direction of dipole is upwards then it should be
r^2 =r1^2 +a^2 + 2ar1*cos(alpha)
What vectors are you adding to get that? What has the geometry of a triangle got to do with the direction of a field?
 
Then why at one equation a negative sign is present and on the other equation a positive sign is present in front of the term 2racos(theta)
 
Crystal037 said:
Then why at one equation a negative sign is present and on the other equation a positive sign is present in front of the term 2racos(theta)
I cannot answer that until you explain how you get the equation with the positive sign.
 
I didn't got it. In the book it's simply written that we got it by geometry
 
cos(α) = -cos(180° -α)
 
Crystal037 said:
I didn't got it. In the book it's simply written that we got it by geometry
You don't seem to be understanding my question.
The book gives this equation, with a negative sign, by geometry, and that is quite easily got by the cosine rule:
Crystal037 said:
r12 =r2 +a2 - 2ar*cos(theta)
Then you wrote this equation with a positive sign, and do not explain how you get it:
Crystal037 said:
But if we try to do vector addition then since direction of dipole is upwards then it should be
r2 =r12 +a2 + 2ar1*cos(alpha)
What is alpha? I don't see that in the diagram. Did you mean theta?
If you take the line of length 2a and continue that upwards, then label the angle between that and the line length r1 as alpha then both equations are correct.
 
I have taken alpha as the angle between a and r1. But I was not talking about my equation. In the book itself there are 2equations, if you see the image then you'll see that after they have written by geometry they have written 2 equations:
First is r1^2 =r^2 +a^2 - 2ar cos(theta)
Second is r2^2 =r^2 +a^2 +2arcos(theta)
Now I understood that they have taken cosine rule and cos(180-theta) =-cos(theta)
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K