Green's First Identity involving Electric Potential

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving an expression for electric potential energy using Green's first identity and vector calculus. The user is working with the potential energy formula, which involves the squared gradient of the electric potential, and is attempting to rewrite it using the Divergence theorem. They recognize the need to apply Poisson's equation and express the potential energy in terms of surface and volume integrals. The main point of confusion lies in understanding how to relate the squared gradient to the dot product of gradients, which is essential for progressing towards the desired expression. Clarification is provided that the squared gradient can indeed be expressed as a dot product, allowing the user to move forward with the derivation.
Parmenides
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I am attempting to work through a paper that involves some slightly unfamiliar vector calculus, as well as many omitted steps. It begins with the potential energy due to an electric field, familiarly expressed as:
<br /> U_{el} = \frac{\epsilon_r\epsilon_0}{2} \iiint_VE^2dV = \frac{\epsilon_r\epsilon_0}{2} \iiint_V(\nabla{\Phi})^2dV<br />
I am not quite sure as to the expression for a squared gradient, but I worked from using ##\nabla(\Phi\nabla\Phi) = (\nabla\Phi)^2 + \Phi\nabla^2\Phi## so that ##(\nabla\Phi)^2 = \nabla(\Phi\nabla\Phi) - \Phi\nabla^2\Phi##. Now, I can rewrite ##U_{el}## as:
<br /> U_{el} = \frac{\epsilon_r\epsilon_0}{2}\Big[\iiint_V\nabla(\Phi\nabla\Phi)dV - \iiint_V\Phi\nabla^2\Phi{dV}\Big]<br />
I recognize the presence of Poisson's equation in the second term, but as for the first? This is where I am stuck. I am supposed to use these expressions together with the Divergence theorem so that I can invoke Green's first identity:
<br /> \int_{\Omega}(\psi\nabla^2\phi + \nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\psi)dV = \oint_{\Omega}\psi(\nabla\phi\cdot{\bf{n}})dS<br />
For two scalar functions ##\psi## and ##\phi##. Ultimately, I need to arrive at the expression:
<br /> U_{el} = \frac{1}{2}\oint_S\sigma\phi_0dS + \frac{1}{2}\iiint_V\rho\Phi{dV}<br />
Using Poisson's equation ##\nabla^2\Phi = -\frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}## and ##\sigma = -{\epsilon_r\epsilon_0}\frac{\partial{\Phi}}{\partial{n}}## and using the fact that ##\phi_0## is the potential at the surface.

But I do not have any dot products associated with what I did above and so I do not see how to proceed; the only way I see how this could work is understanding that there is really only one scalar function here instead of two, namely ##\Phi##, but I don't see this allowing me to make ##\nabla(\Phi\nabla\Phi) = \nabla\Phi\cdot\nabla\Phi##. Am I forgetting something simple?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You...you are right there to solving it. You already showed that ##\nabla(\Phi\nabla\Phi)=(\nabla\Phi)^2+\Phi\nabla^2\Phi##

So I think the only point you're stuck on should be: ##(\nabla\Phi)^2=\nabla\Phi\cdot\nabla\Phi##

Can you do it from here?

Maybe a slightly bigger hint. I can rewrite Green's identity, if ##\phi=\psi## as such:

$$\int_\Omega (\psi\nabla^2\phi+\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\psi)dV=\int_\Omega (\phi\nabla^2\phi+\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi)dV=\int_\Omega \nabla(\phi\nabla\phi) dV=\oint_{\partial\Omega} \phi(\nabla\phi\cdot{\bf{n}})dS$$
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top