Griffith's ED Chapter 4 Clarification (Bound Charges)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jason Williams
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charges
Jason Williams
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I'm having an issue with the equation that Griffith uses to derive the field of a polarized object. In Chapter 4, Section 2.1, he starts off with equation 4.8 with the 'script r' to denote the distance between a point outside the distribution P (and the origin) and the dipole (and the origin). He references equation 3.99 to 'derive' this, but equation 3.99 is the field from a dipole and only depends on the distance from the origin to the point P. I don't quite understand how he makes this jump.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think he's using script r to denote distance from the dipole to the point in question because he's no longer dealing with distances far from the dipole where r and script r are basically equivalent.
 
  • Like
Likes Jason Williams
Okay that's what I figured, but is it fair just to make that substitution? Like why not use the regular equation for the potential?
 
I mean they're equivalent except for the definition of distance that you use. Technically the one with script r is more correct I think, but for distances far from the dipole you approximate with r.

The equation is an approximation anyway, but there are orders of correctness I guess.
 
  • Like
Likes Jason Williams
Okay cool, got it. Thanks so much!
 
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