Image charge method to find Green's function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the differences between the image charge method and the orthonormal eigenfunction method for determining Green's functions. The image charge method is noted to be challenging for systems like two infinite parallel conducting plates, as it requires an infinite series of image charges. Both methods yield the same results when applicable, but the image charge method is not always practical. An example is provided where the Green's function can be determined for simpler geometries, such as half-planes and spheres. The conversation suggests that while the image charge method can be used for parallel plates, it complicates the solution process.
ahmad1992
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
hi guys,
my professor told me in the class that when we would like to determine green function there are two general method i.e using image charge and using orthonormal eigen function. However I don't understand what are the specific differences between them. Anybody can help me? Moreover in the problem systems that solved by using image charge (as far as I have seen), there is always point charge there. Can image charge method be used in a problem like finding green function in a space (without charge) between 2 infinite parallel conducting plates for example?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you give an example of finding Green's function by either method?
 
That's why I am asking, can we use both of them for same problem or not ?
 
ahmad1992 said:
Moreover in the problem systems that solved by using image charge (as far as I have seen), there is always point charge there. Can image charge method be used in a problem like finding green function in a space (without charge) between 2 infinite parallel conducting plates for example?
The Green's function is defined as the potential due to a point charge with all surfaces grounded.
The image charge method is difficult to use for 2 parallel plates, because that requires an infinite set of image charges.
 
Oh unfortunately I have a task to solve it usi b g image charge
 
The only difference between the two methods is that the image-charge method is not always applicable in practice. Of course, at the end you get the same result with both methods when applicable. It works for the half-plane and the sphere straight-forwardly. For two parallel plates I think you can use it, introducing an infinite series of image charges and summing up their contributions.

Since this is a typical home-work problem, you should ask this question in the homework section.
 
Susskind (in The Theoretical Minimum, volume 1, pages 203-205) writes the Lagrangian for the magnetic field as ##L=\frac m 2(\dot x^2+\dot y^2 + \dot z^2)+ \frac e c (\dot x A_x +\dot y A_y +\dot z A_z)## and then calculates ##\dot p_x =ma_x + \frac e c \frac d {dt} A_x=ma_x + \frac e c(\frac {\partial A_x} {\partial x}\dot x + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial y}\dot y + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial z}\dot z)##. I have problems with the last step. I might have written ##\frac {dA_x} {dt}...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...
Back
Top