Find the charge distribution from the given E-field (spherical)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on determining the charge distribution from a given electric field (E-field) in spherical coordinates. Participants confirm that a static charge distribution results in a static electric field, validated by the curl of E being zero. The charge density is expressed as ## \rho = -\epsilon_0 \alpha e^{-\lambda R} (\lambda R + 1) \frac{1}{ R^2} ##, correcting earlier miscalculations. The importance of conservative fields in relation to static E-fields is emphasized, with clarifications on the divergence and curl operations in vector calculus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically curl and divergence operations.
  • Familiarity with electrostatics concepts, including electric fields and charge distributions.
  • Knowledge of spherical coordinates and their application in physics.
  • Proficiency in using mathematical software tools like Wolfram Alpha for calculations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of conservative fields in electrostatics.
  • Learn about the mathematical derivation of charge distributions from electric fields.
  • Explore the application of divergence and curl in different coordinate systems.
  • Investigate the implications of static versus dynamic electric fields in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism who seek to deepen their understanding of electric fields and charge distributions in spherical coordinates.

goohu
Messages
53
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
see picture
Relevant Equations
1) ##\nabla \times E = 0##

2) ##\rho = \epsilon_0 \nabla \cdot E##
a) Static charge distribution should result in a static electric field? Legitimacy should be checked with curl of E = 0?

b) Using the second equation should give is the answer?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    8.1 KB · Views: 165
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
Why not proceed as if you got a yes and a yes as answers and see what comes out !
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
I already did , I just wanted to confirm.

For:

a) ## \nabla \times E = (0, 0, -5)##. So it is legitimate since it is not 0.

b) ## \rho = \epsilon_0 \alpha e^{-\lambda R} (\lambda R + 1) \frac{1}{ R^2} ##
 
Don't understand a) at all ... 🤔
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Actually I recalculated the curl of E and I got it to 0.

This is actually the condition for the E-field to be legitimate (since it is conservative).

From my textbook I've learned that a field that is not conservative is not an E-field.

Sorry about the confusion.
 
goohu said:
From my textbook I've learned that a field that is not conservative is not an E-field
Slight (but important) correction: A field that is not conservative is not a static(time independent) E-field
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz and goohu
Slight correction (i think) for b) of post #3 i am getting the parenthesis as## (1-\lambda R)## instead of ##(1+\lambda R)##
 
I missed a minus sign. I got it to ## \rho = -\epsilon_0 \alpha e^{-\lambda R} (\lambda R + 1) \frac{1}{ R^2} ##

using quotient rule
 
well I seem to calculate $$\epsilon_0\alpha\frac{1}{R^2}\frac{\partial (Re^{-\lambda R})}{\partial R}$$ where do i go wrong?
 
  • #10
Seems I am wrong , I calculated ##\nabla E ## instead of ## \nabla \cdot E##
 
  • #12
Yeah I think you got it right. Its in spherical coordinates, I attached the picture of the problem in the opening post.
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K