"Energy Type Functionals" in Jackson

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the concept of "energy type functionals" as presented in section 1.12 of Jackson's work on electrostatics. The discussion highlights the variational approach to deriving the equations of motion, specifically the identification of the scalar potential ##\psi=\phi## and charge density ##g=\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}##. A critical analysis reveals that the functional for electrostatic energy, $$I[\psi]=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}|\vec{E}|^2d^3x-\frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\int_{V}\rho\phi d^3x$$ does not double count energy as initially perceived, but rather serves to construct the energy functional necessary for deriving field equations. The derivation of the energy functional is confirmed through integration by parts and application of variational principles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of variational principles in physics
  • Familiarity with electrostatics and the Laplace and Poisson equations
  • Knowledge of Noether's theorem and its application to symmetries
  • Proficiency in calculus, particularly integration by parts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the variational approach to the Laplace and Poisson equations in more detail
  • Learn about the application of Noether's theorem in deriving conservation laws
  • Explore the derivation of energy functionals in classical field theory
  • Investigate the relationship between charge density and electric fields in electrostatics
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, particularly those specializing in electromagnetism, theoretical physicists interested in variational methods, and students studying advanced classical mechanics and field theory.

Luke Tan
Messages
29
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
Why does Jackson's "Energy Type Functionals" seem to double count the energy?
In section 1.12 Variational Approach to the Solution of the Laplace and Poisson Equations, Jackson mentions that in electrostatics, we can consider "energy type functionals". He gives, for Dirichlet Boundary Conditions,
$$I[\psi]=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}\nabla\psi\cdot\nabla\psi d^3x-\int_{V}g\psi d^3 x$$
After variation, he then finds the equations of motion,
$$\nabla^2\psi=-g$$
This would intuitively lead me to make the identification of ##\psi=\phi## as the scalar potential, and ##g=\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}## to be the charge density. However, substituting this into the functional gives
$$I[\psi]=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}|\vec{E}|^2d^3x-\frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\int_{V}\rho\phi d^3x$$
The first term is the electrostatic energy, and the second is the electrostatic energy too. Doesn't this double count the energy? While I understand that if energy is minimized, twice the energy is minimized too, why must we double count the energy in order to get the correct equations of motion? Why can't we just minimize this functional?
$$I[\psi]=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}|\vec{E}|^2d^3x$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why should the functional be the field energy to begin with? It's just a functional letting you derive the electrostatic field equations given the source ##g=\rho/\epsilon_0##.

To get the field energy (as well as momentum and angular momentum) from variational principles you need to analyze the action functional and apply Noether's theorem to the relativistic space-time symmetries (temporal and spatial translations, rotations, Lorentz boosts, in short the proper orthochronous Poincare group).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Luke Tan said:
I[\psi]=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}|\vec{E}|^2d^3x-\frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\int_{V}\rho\phi d^3x
The first term is the electrostatic energy, and the second is the electrostatic energy too.

No, the second term is not the electrostatic energy. The electrostatic energy is given by \mathcal{E} = \frac{1}{2}\int d^{3}x \ \rho (x) \ \varphi (x). If you use \rho = \frac{1}{4 \pi} \nabla \cdot \vec{E} = - \frac{1}{4 \pi} \nabla^{2}\varphi , and integrate by parts, you find \frac{1}{2}\int d^{3}x \ \rho (x) \ \varphi (x) = \frac{1}{8 \pi} \int d^{3}x \ \nabla \varphi \cdot \nabla \varphi = \frac{1}{8 \pi} \int d^{3}x \ \vec{E} \cdot \vec{E} . So, if you rearrange the terms, you find \mathcal{E} - \int d^{3}x \ \rho (x) \varphi (x) = \int d^{3}x \left( \frac{1}{8 \pi} \nabla \varphi \cdot \nabla \varphi - \rho \ \varphi \right) = -\frac{1}{2} \int d^{3}x \ \rho (x) \varphi (x) . Clearly, the expression in the middle (which is the I[\varphi] of Jackson) is not double the electrostatic energy.
Now, the meaningful question (which I will answer) is: where did Jackson get his functional from? Well, he knew that \nabla^{2}\varphi + 4 \pi \rho = 0. So, he needs to construct A[\varphi] such that \frac{\delta A}{\delta \varphi} = - \left( \nabla^{2}\varphi + 4 \pi \rho \right) . The minus sign is there for convenience and allows us to interpret A[\varphi] as “energy functional”. Assuming that the functional A exists, we consider the functional A[\psi_{\lambda}] evaluated along the straight line “path” \psi_{\lambda}(x) = \lambda \varphi (x) + (1 - \lambda ) \psi_{0}(x) , \ \ \ \ \ 0 \leq \lambda \leq 1 , that begins at the point \psi_{0}(x) = 0 and end at \psi_{1}(x) = \varphi (x). The derivative of the functional A[\psi_{\lambda}] with respect to \lambda is \frac{d}{d\lambda}A[\psi_{\lambda}] = \int d^{3}x \frac{\delta A}{\delta \psi_{\lambda}} \frac{\partial \psi_{\lambda}}{\partial \lambda} . Now, using \frac{\delta A}{\delta \psi_{\lambda}} = - \left( \nabla^{2} \psi_{\lambda} + 4 \pi \rho \right), \ \ \ \ \frac{\partial \psi_{\lambda}(x)}{\partial \lambda} = \varphi (x), we find
\frac{d}{d\lambda}A[\psi_{\lambda}] = - \int d^{3}x \left( \lambda \ \nabla^{2}\varphi + 4 \pi \rho (x) \right) \varphi (x) . Integrating from \lambda = 0 to \lambda = 1, we find A[\psi_{1}] \equiv A[\varphi] = \int d^{3}x \left( - \frac{1}{2} \varphi \nabla^{2}\varphi - 4 \pi \rho (x) \varphi (x) \right) + \mbox{Const.} \ , where the constant term is A[\psi_{0}]. Finally, integrating the first term by parts gives us the wanted “energy functional” (up to additive constant) A[\varphi] = \int d^{3}x \left( \frac{1}{2} \nabla \varphi \cdot \nabla \varphi - 4 \pi \ \rho (x) \varphi (x) \right) .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi and vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
898
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
92
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K