Electrostatics: Understanding this "Work Done" Line Integral Question

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the evaluation of the work done in electrostatics using line integrals. The work done in moving a test charge from infinity to a point R is expressed as \(\int_{\infty}^{R} \vec F_{me} \cdot d\vec r\), where \(\vec F_{me} = -\vec F_{elec}\). Participants clarify that the direction of the force and the line element significantly impact the sign of the integral. The confusion arises from the evaluation of the dot product and the limits of integration, emphasizing that changing the limits alters the sign of the integral, which is crucial for obtaining the correct result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, particularly line integrals
  • Familiarity with electrostatic concepts, including electric fields and potential energy
  • Knowledge of the dot product and its implications in physics
  • Basic grasp of integral calculus and limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of line integrals in vector calculus
  • Explore electrostatic potential energy and its mathematical formulation
  • Learn about the implications of force direction on work done in physics
  • Investigate the properties of dot products in vector analysis
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on electromagnetism, as well as educators looking to clarify concepts related to work done in electric fields.

  • #31
haruspex said:
There may be scope for ambiguity here. There's keeping the direction of the vector ##d\vec r## constant, and there's keeping constant the direction defined as positive for it.

Viewing the integral as an ordered sum, each ##d \vec r## is a step along the path from the lower bound to the upper bound. If the direction from R to ∞ is defined as positive, and R is the lower bound, then each ##d \vec r## is a positive step. If we reverse the bounds then we are stepping from ∞ to R, so each vector element is a negative step.Following my reasoning above, setting the lower bound as R and the upper as infinity determines that ##d \vec r ## is outwards.

Okay, I think this makes more sense to me now. To see if I am understanding what you mean: I should keep the d \vec r vector pointing in the same way as the parameter r increases (i.e. outwards)?
PeroK said:
If you are using ##\vec r## as the vector from the origin, then this is different from using ##d \vec r## as the inwards line element.

Swapping between them could be the root of your problem.

Yes, thinking about this a bit more, that does seem to be the problem.

Is this also true for general line integrals? For example, if we want to integrate along a path, parameterized by p, then we ought to have dp in the direction of (or tangential to the path at that point) of p increasing regardless of which direction we want to go (from high to low p or vice versa)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
All this confusion can be avoided by following this procedure when doing line integrals.
1. Write the field vector in the coordinate system of your choice using unit vector notation.
Here, ##\vec E=\frac{kQ}{r^2}~\hat r##
2. Write the element ##d\vec l## in standard unit vector notation ignoring the path direction. The convention is that ##d(something)## is positive when the ##(something)## is increasing.
Here, ##d\vec l=dr~\hat r##. In Cartesian coordinates it will always be ##d\vec l=dx~\hat x+dy~\hat y+dz~\hat z##.
3. Take the the dot product as suggested by the integrand.
Here, ##\vec E \cdot d\vec l=\frac{kQ}{r^2}~\hat r \cdot (dr~\hat r)=\frac{kQ}{r^2}dr##.
4. Integrate using the starting point as the lower limit and the end point as the upper limit. The limits define the sign of the integral.

If you follow this procedure, you cannot go wrong because it's based on the formal definition of the inner product and not on the ##AB\cos\theta## thing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Master1022 and PeroK

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K