Find the net outward flux through the surface and the charge density

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the net outward flux through a surface and determining the charge density. A key point is that the numerical coefficient for the ##\theta## component of ##\mathbf D## should be 10, not 20, which affects the divergence evaluation. Participants discuss the implications of a zero answer for the flux and whether it makes sense given the charge density found. There is also a consideration of integrating over a hemisphere and the potential issues at the origin due to the field's singularity. The divergence of ##\mathbf D## is noted to be undefined at ##r = 0##, which is crucial for the calculations.
vboyn12
Messages
16
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Find the net outward flux through the surface and the charge density. (Help please)
Relevant Equations
Relevant equations in a photo below. I try to solve it but the result is 0 which makes me confused
1.jpg
2.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
4.jpg
 
When taking the divergence, note that the ##\theta## component of ##\mathbf D## has a numerical coefficient of 10, not 20.

After you find the charge density, you might be able to see whether or not a zero answer for the flux through the spherical surface makes sense.

What do you get for part (b)?
 
Sorry. I now see where the factor of 20 comes from in evaluating the ##\theta## component of the divergence. Your work looks OK to me.
 
TSny said:
When taking the divergence, note that the ##\theta## component of ##\mathbf D## has a numerical coefficient of 10, not 20.

After you find the charge density, you might be able to see whether or not a zero answer for the flux through the spherical surface makes sense.

What do you get for part (b)?
I think it must be 20 because when taking partial derivative of D(theta component)*sin(theta) respect to theta we can obtain derivative of sin(theta)^2=2sin(theta)cos(theta). This is the first time I post thread so excuse me about the math formulas
 
TSny said:
Sorry. I now see where the factor of 20 comes from in evaluating the ##\theta## component of the divergence. Your work looks OK to me

TSny said:
Sorry. I now see where the factor of 20 comes from in evaluating the ##\theta## component of the divergence. Your work looks OK to me.
thank you. Can you give me some hints to do part (b), please?
 
vboyn12 said:
I think it must be 20 because when taking partial derivative of D(theta component)*sin(theta) respect to theta we can obtain derivative of sin(theta)^2=2sin(theta)cos(theta). This is the first time I post thread so excuse me about the math formulas
Yes, you are right. Your work looks correct.
 
vboyn12 said:
thank you. Can you give me some hints to do part (b), please?
All you need is a minor modification of your work for part (a). Would any of the limits of integration change?
 
TSny said:
All you need is a minor modification of your work for part (a). Would any of the limits of integration change?
theta from 0 to pi/2, is it correct?
 
  • #10
vboyn12 said:
theta from 0 to pi/2, is it correct?
Yes. Do you know if the hemisphere is meant to include a flat base?
 
  • #11
TSny said:
Yes. Do you know if the hemisphere is meant to include a flat base?
So we have to take a double integral of the flat base with limits r from 0 to 1 and phi from 0 to 2pi, i guest
 
  • #12
vboyn12 said:
So we have to take a double integral of the flat base with limits r from 0 to 1 and phi from 0 to 2pi, i guest
Yes. However, there could be a difficulty here due to the fact that the field blows up as ##1/r^3## for ##r## going to zero. So, maybe they don't want you to include the base. I don't know.

This singularity of the field also means that the divergence of ##\mathbf D## is not actually defined at ##r = 0##. Your result ##\nabla \cdot \mathbf D = 0## is valid for all points except at the origin.
 
  • #13
TSny said:
Yes. However, there could be a difficulty here due to the fact that the field blows up as ##1/r^3## for ##r## going to zero. So, maybe they don't want you to include the base. I don't know.

This singularity of the field also means that the divergence of ##\mathbf D## is not actually defined at ##r = 0##. Your result ##\nabla \cdot \mathbf D = 0## is valid for all points except at the origin.
thank you a lot.
 
  • Like
Likes TSny
  • #14
vboyn12 said:
thank you a lot.
Can you take some time to have a look at another topic of mine?
 
Back
Top