Fourier Transform Applied to Electrostatics

ordirules
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


How would you solve the one-dimensional Poisson's equation:

$\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}$

Using Fourier Transforms?

$\phi (x) = \int ^{+\infty}_{-\infty} G(k) e^{-i k x} dk$<br /> <br /> $G(k) = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} \phi (x) dx$

I've been trying to understand Fourier transforms and I do not yet see how they help; I cannot solve this equation with Fourier. If someone could show me and explain that would be helpful, thanks.

Homework Equations


$\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}$<br /> <br /> $\phi (x) = \int ^{+\infty}_{-\infty} G(k) e^{-i k x} dk$<br /> <br /> $G(k) = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} \phi (x) dx$<br /> <br />

The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Fourier transforms change linear differential equations into algebraic equations, which are usually easier to solve. What happens when you take your expression for phi, and differentiate it with respect to x?
 
I get
<br /> $\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (-k^2) G(k) e^{-ikx} dk = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0}$<br />

If I Fourier transform back the other side I just get:

<br /> $\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (- k^2) G(k) e^{ix(k&#039;-k)} dk dx = \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \rho (x) e^{-ikx} dx}{\epsilon_0}<br />

(Assuming one dimension to be simpler)

I don't see how this turns into a linear equation. Forgive me if I am being naif, but I just can't see the step.

Thanks for the reply
 
I just realized I posted this a while ago, I must write a correction to it, in case anyone finds it.
I cannot see what Ben was suggesting, it does not make sense, I was asking for some kind of proof, not some procedure that is done because everybody knows that's how it works

But here is what I believe is why, if I am wrong, someone please correct it

<br /> $\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0}$Integrate with respect to $e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}}d\vec{x}$ on both sides:<br /> <br /> $\int \nabla^2 \phi(\vec{x}) e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}}d\vec{x} = \int e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0} d\vec{x}$Now, we use integration by parts, and assume that $\phi (\vec{x})$ goes off at $\pm \infty$ to get (you can do this yourselves). ($\phi$ not dying off at infinity is not something physical, or at least not so common in physics equations :-D)<br /> <br /> $-|k|^2 \int \phi(\vec{x}) e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} d\vec{x} = \int e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0} d\vec{x} $<br /> <br /> $-|k|^2 \hat{\phi}(\vec{k}) = \int e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0} d\vec{x} $<br /> <br /> I&#039;ve used multiple dimensions here, you can just substitute $\vec{x} = x$ and $d\vec{x} = dx$, and $\phi(\vec{x}) = \phi(x_1, x_2, ..., x_N) \rightarrow \phi(x)$ for one dimension (same for k)<br /> <br /> If this is wrong, someone please correct me but I am pretty confident this is right. I wish someone would have explained this to me correctly...<br /> <br /> [\latex]
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top