Help polishing off a Classical E&M HW question

Neumann12
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This isn't the whole homework problem but I need to show that (p dot gradient operator)E is equal to Gradient operator(p Dot E)


Homework Equations



P= Dipole Moment
E= non constant electric field.

The Attempt at a Solution


Like I said this is the last part of the problem, I just can't make this jump.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Neumann12,

I know of two physicists who can properly explain your homework and help you understand it. One ("srastgoo") is a Ph.D. candidate in quantum physics with a specialization in black holes. The other ("jsharma") has a Master's in applied physics. For the sole purpose of helping you reach these persons, I am giving you a homework help link that will lead to both of them.

After clicking on the link, register on the site (it's free) and submit a Solution Request. The important part is to enter "srastgoo" in the Specialist's username field. You can also do the same for "jsharma" with a separate Solution Request.

Please post back to me here and let me know which one of them helped you and how well they explained your homework question.
 
Have you tried expanding the (p dot gradient)E with some vector algebra rules? I'm not saying it will work, but it seems like the obvious way to start to me.
 
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