Laplacian of electrostatic potensial

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Laplacian of the electrostatic potential in various charge distributions, exploring whether the Laplacian is always zero and examining specific cases such as point charges, lines of charge, and planes of charge.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents calculations for the Laplacian of the scalar potential for a point charge, a line of uniform charge density, and a plane of uniform charge density, concluding that the Laplacian is zero in these cases.
  • Another participant argues that the Laplacian of the scalar potential is not generally zero, referencing the relationship between electric field and charge density.
  • A participant questions the correctness of their calculations, suggesting that the Laplacian for the point charge potential should yield a different result.
  • Another participant suggests that the issues arise from dealing with charge distributions that involve singularities, indicating that the Laplacian may not behave well in such cases.
  • This participant also draws an analogy with the divergence of the electric field of a point charge, noting that while the divergence appears to be zero when computed directly, it is actually non-zero due to the singularity at the origin.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the Laplacian of the scalar potential is always zero, with some calculations suggesting it is, while others argue against this and highlight the complexities introduced by singularities in charge distributions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the behavior of the Laplacian may be influenced by singularities present in the charge distributions, which complicates the analysis.

espen180
Messages
831
Reaction score
2
Something occurred to me just now. A question about the scalar potential.

First I will do some calculations of the laplacian of the scalar potential in different electrostatic situations to give myself a basis for my question.

Point charge:
[tex]\phi =\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac{q}{r}[/tex]

[tex]\nabla^2\phi=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^2\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r}\right)=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^2\left(-\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac{q}{r^2}\right)\right)=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon_0}=0[/tex]

Line of uniform charge density:
[tex]\phi=\frac{1}{2\pi\epsilon_0}\lambda \ln r[/tex]

[tex]\nabla^2\phi=\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r}\right)=\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r\left(\frac{1}{2\pi\epsilon_0}\lambda\frac{1}{r}\right)\right)=\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(\frac{1}{2\pi\epsilon_0}\lambda\right)=0[/tex]

Plane of uniform charge density:
[tex]\phi=\frac{z\sigma}{2\epsilon_0}[/tex]

[tex]\nabla^2\phi=\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial z^2}=0[/tex]



My question then arises: Is the laplacian of the scalar potential always zero?

If no, please show a counterexample.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I understand your question correctly, then no, in general the Laplacian of the scalar potential is not 0. Remember that:

[tex]\vec{E} = -\vec{\nabla} \phi[/tex]

And that...

[tex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{E} = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}[/tex]

Therefore

[tex]\frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{E} = \vec{\nabla} \cdot (-\vec{\nabla}\phi) = -\nabla^2 \phi[/tex]
 
Last edited:
I realize this, but then how are my calculations above incorrect? I took the laplacian of the point charge potential. Shouldn't this then get me [tex]\frac{3q}{4\pi\epsilon_0r^3}[/tex] ?
 
So what gives with your examples? In short, I believe it is because you are dealing with charge distributions that involve singularities. The Laplacian doesn't behave well because of this.

Take the analogous case of the divergence of the E-field of a point charge:

[tex]\vec{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0}\frac{q}{r^2}[/tex]

On one hand, we know that the divergence of the point charge isn't zero. But on the other, when we actually compute the divergence:

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left( r^2 \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{q}{r^2} \right) = \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left( \frac{q}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \right) = 0[/tex]

So it appears something catastrophic has happened. But the trick is to realize that the magnitude of the electric field is infinite at the origin. To get the actual divergence, we must use the Divergence Theorem.

See this page for more: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=165292"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you, that thread cleared things up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
975
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
588