Fourier Transform Applied to Electrostatics

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the one-dimensional Poisson's equation, represented as $\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}$, using Fourier transforms. Participants are exploring how Fourier transforms can simplify the process of solving differential equations in the context of electrostatics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the application of Fourier transforms to the Poisson's equation but expresses difficulty in seeing how this method leads to a solution. Other participants discuss differentiating the expression for $\phi$ and the implications of transforming both sides of the equation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing insights into the differentiation process and the transformation of the equation. There is a recognition of the need for clarification on the steps involved, and one participant expresses a desire for a more thorough explanation rather than a procedural outline.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that assumptions about the behavior of $\phi$ at infinity are under discussion, as well as the physical implications of these assumptions in the context of the problem.

ordirules
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


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

[tex]$\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}$[/tex]

Using Fourier Transforms?

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

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


[tex]$\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}$<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 /> [/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution

[tex][/tex]
 
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
[tex] $\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (-k^2) G(k) e^{-ikx} dk = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0}$[/tex]

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

[tex] $\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (- k^2) G(k) e^{ix(k'-k)} dk dx = \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \rho (x) e^{-ikx} dx}{\epsilon_0}[/tex]

(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

[itex] $\nabla ^2 \phi = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0}$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'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][/itex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K