Is Equation 2.49 Necessary for Griffith's Problem 3.19?

Thread starter ehrenfest
Start date Feb 17, 2008

Join the discussion

Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.

Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips

1 reply · 4K views

ehrenfest

Thread starter
Feb 17, 2008

Homework Statement

Please stop reading this unless you have Griffiths E and M book.
Are we supposed to use equation 2.49 to do this? Isn't that only true for conductors? If not, how do you do the problem without using equation 2.49?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

Physics news on Phys.org

Single fission experiment maps excess gamma rays from more than a dozen unstable nuclei
Cold radioactive molecules prepped and readied for physics discoveries
Scientists create stable 'boron graphene' and uncover quantum liquid crystal state

Biest

Feb 17, 2008

Eqn. 3.83 and 3.84 are a better bet

Last edited: Feb 17, 2008

Is Equation 2.49 Necessary for Griffith's Problem 3.19?

Homework Statement

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

Thermodynamics of capacitor filled with a linear ideal gas dielectric

A rocket and the Coriolis acceleration

Minimizing angular momentum uncertainties

Calculating Dipole Moment In 3s To 2p Hydrogen Transition

Spatial Perturbative Hamiltonians In Systems of Identical Particles

Insights Revisiting the Velocity-Time Function

Insights Remote Operated Gate Control System

Insights AI Enriched Problem Solving

Insights Thinking Outside The Box Versus Knowing What’s In The Box

Insights Why Entangled Photon-Polarization Qubits Violate Bell’s Inequality

Insights Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect

Is Equation 2.49 Necessary for Griffith's Problem 3.19?

Homework Statement

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

Similar threads