Jackson Electrodynamics problem 6.5b

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving Jackson's Electrodynamics problem 6.5b, focusing on the momentum of electromagnetic fields generated by a localized electric charge distribution and a time-independent current density. Part a) was resolved by substituting the electric field with the electrostatic potential and integrating, leading to the correct expression for field momentum. In part b), the challenge lies in expanding the electrostatic potential in a Taylor series and demonstrating the relationship between the field momentum, electric field at the current distribution, and the magnetic moment. The user initially struggled with the integral involving the electric field and current density but later found guidance in Jackson's text, leading to a clearer path to the solution. The conversation highlights the importance of referencing established texts for clarification in complex derivations.
andrew1982
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A localized electric charge distribution produces an electrostatic field,
<br /> {\bf E}=-\nabla \phi <br />
Into this field is placed a small localized time-independent current density J(x) which generates a magnetic field H.
a) show that the momentum of these electromagnetic fields, (6.117), can be transformed to
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=\frac{1}{c^2}\int \phi {\bf J} d^3x <br />

b) Assuming that the current distribution is localized to a region small compared to the scale of variation of the electric field, expand the electrostatic potential in a Taylor series and show that
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=\frac{1}{c^2}{\bf E(0)\times m}<br />
where E(0) is the electric field at the current distribution and m is the magnetic moment (5.54), caused by the current.

Homework Equations


(6.117):
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=\mu_0 \epsilon_0 \int {\bf E \times H} d^3x<br />
(5.54):
<br /> {\bf m}=\frac{1}{2} \int {\bf x&#039; \times J(x&#039;)} d^3x&#039;<br />

The Attempt at a Solution


Part a) was straight forward: subsituting E=- grad phi and integrating by parts gives the answer plus a surface integral that goes to 0 if phi*H goes to 0 faster than 1/r^2.

Part b): This is where I get stuck. I tried to put
<br /> \phi=\phi(0)+\nabla \phi(0)\cdot{\bf x}<br />
which replaced in the integral for P_field from a) gives
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=-\frac{1}{c^2} \int {\bf (E(0)\cdot x) J)} d^3x<br />
if I choose the potential to zero at the origin. Further, using
<br /> {\bf a\times (b\times c)=(a\cdot c) b-(a\cdot b)c}<br />
on the integrand I get
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=\frac{1}{c^2} (\int {\bf E(0)\times (x\times J) }d^3x-\int{\bf (E(0)\cdot J)x}\,d^3x)<br />
The first integral is as far I can see
<br /> \frac{2}{c^2} {\bf E(0)\times m}<br />
that is, twice the answer. The second integral gets me stuck. I guess I should show that it is equal to minus half of the answer (if I did everything correctly so far), but I don't see how to do this.

I would appreciate if anyone could give me a hint on how to continue or if I'm on the right track at all. Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Somewhere else in Jackson (and other texts) it is shown the second integral
equals EXm. It's in Sec. 5.6 of teh 2nd Edition, if you can follow it.
 
If you believe that the second integral is indeed equal to Exm, then why not simply write them both out in components to prove it? Granted it's not really a proper derivation, but you were only asked to show that the formula is true.
 
Thanks for your replies, it was very helpful! Using section 5.6 of Jackson as you said I saw that I could show directly that the first integral
<br /> {\bf P_{field}}=-\frac{1}{c^2} \int {\bf (E(0)\cdot x) J)} d^3x<br />
is equal to the sought answer without using the abc vector rule. Looking below eq. 5.52 (in the 3rd edition) and substituting x by E(0) the whole derivation is there.
 
How about the part C
 
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...
Back
Top