Help with derivation of electric field of a moving charge

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of the electric field from a moving charge, starting with the expression for the magnetic field. The user derives the electric field using the vector potential and applies the chain rule, leading to a complex expression involving derivatives of variables with respect to time. They identify a discrepancy in the first term of their derived electric field equation, which has a dimension of T^-1, while it should be dimensionless. The user seeks assistance in locating the source of this error and understanding its implications. The conversation emphasizes the importance of dimensional consistency in physical equations.
GilSE
Messages
9
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
Derive electric field of moving charge formulas from Lienard-Wiechert potentials.
Relevant Equations
Formulas of electromagnetic field of moving charge to be derived:
$$\vec E=\frac q {\mu^3}\left((1-\beta^2)\vec R-R(1-\beta^2)\vec\beta\right)+\frac q{c\mu^3}\left(\vec R\times\left((\vec R-R\vec\beta)\times\vec\beta\right)\right)$$
$$\vec B =\frac{\vec R}{R}\times\vec E$$
$$\mu=R-\vec\beta\cdot\vec R$$
##\vec R## is a difference between point, where the fields are calculated, and the point, where moving charge are.
Here and further, all values are considered taken in ##t'## moment (except those in general formulas for calculating EMF from potentials)
Values in the right side of these equations should be calculated at the moment ##t'## given by equation: ##R(t')=c(t-t')##.
One can derive field equations from Lienard-Wiechert potentials:
$$\varphi = \frac q {\mu}$$
$$\vec A=\frac{q\vec\beta}{\mu}$$
By general formulas:
$$\vec E = -\nabla\varphi-\frac 1 c \frac{\partial\vec A}{\partial t}$$
$$\vec B=\nabla\times\vec A$$
Also I have these relations from my textbook:
$$\frac{\partial R}{\partial t'}=-c\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R$$
$$\frac {\partial t'}{\partial t}=\frac R{\mu}$$
At first, I derived that:
$$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$
(dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##).
I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field.

To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula.
$$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t'}\frac {\partial t'}{\partial t}=q\frac {\partial t'}{\partial t}\left(\frac1\mu\frac{\partial\vec\beta}{\partial t'}-\frac 1{\mu^2}\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial t'}\vec\beta\right)=q\frac {\partial t'}{\partial t}\left(\frac1\mu\dot{\vec\beta}-\frac 1{\mu^2}\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial t'}\vec\beta\right)$$
Then calculated separately:
$$\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial t'}=\frac{\partial R}{\partial t'}-\frac{\partial(\vec\beta\cdot\vec R)}{\partial t'}=\frac{\partial R}{\partial t'}-\vec\beta\cdot\frac{\partial\vec R}{\partial t'}-\vec R\cdot\frac{\partial\vec\beta}{\partial t'}$$
Now use the fact that:
$$\frac{\partial R}{\partial t'}=-c\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R$$
Also, obviously:
$$\frac{\partial \vec R}{\partial t'}=-c\vec\beta$$
Substituting these two formulas in the above one:
$$\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial t'}=-c\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R+c\beta^2-\vec R\cdot\dot{\vec\beta}$$
And finally:
$$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=q\frac {\partial t'}{\partial t}\left(\frac1\mu\dot{\vec\beta}-\frac 1{\mu^2}\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial t'}\vec\beta\right)=$$
$$=q\frac R\mu\left(\frac 1 \mu\dot{\vec\beta}+\frac 1 {\mu^2}\left(c\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R-c\beta^2+\vec R\cdot\dot{\vec\beta}\right)\vec\beta\right)=$$
$$=q\frac R{\mu^3}\left(\mu\dot{\vec\beta}+\left(c\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R-c\beta^2+\vec R\cdot\dot{\vec\beta}\right)\vec\beta\right)$$
Using expression for ##\nabla\frac 1{\mu}##, electric field is:
$$\vec E=\frac q{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R-q\frac R{\mu^3}\left(\frac{\mu\dot{\vec\beta}}c+\left(\frac{\vec\beta\cdot\vec R}R-\beta^2+\frac{\vec R\cdot\dot{\vec\beta}}c\right)\vec\beta\right)=$$
$$=\frac q {\mu^3}\left((1-\beta^2)\vec R-R\left(\frac{\vec R\cdot\dot{\vec\beta}}R-\beta^2\right)\vec\beta\right)+\frac q {c\mu^3}\left((\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot R)\vec R-\mu R\dot{\vec\beta}-R(\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot R)\vec\beta\right)$$
The second part after simplification matches the second part of Lienard-Wiechert E-field equation, but the first slightly differs, and I can't find an error causing it. I'll appreciate any help with finding it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1761768611693.webp

The first term has dimension of T^-1 though it should be non dimensional. You should investigate its derivation.
 
Last edited:
Besides the error pointed out by @anuttarasammyak, check your work for the following:
GilSE said:
At first, I derived that:
1761776639186.webp
I get an additional term proportional to ##\vec{\beta}##. $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R + \frac 1 {\mu^2} \vec{\beta}$$
GilSE said:
I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field.
Verify that the additional term does not alter the result for the magnetic field.
 
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Thread 'Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem'
Hi, I'm stuck at this question, please help. Attempt to the Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem (a) Electric Field and Potential at O due to Induced Charges $$V_O = 0$$ This potential is the sum of the potentials due to the real charges (##+q, -q##) and the induced charges on the sphere. $$V_O = V_{\text{real}} + V_{\text{induced}} = 0$$ - Electric Field at O, ##\vec{E}_O##: Since point O is inside a conductor in electrostatic equilibrium, the electric field there must be zero...
Back
Top