Laurent Series Expansion of Electrostatic Potential

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the electrostatic potential generated by a linear quadrupole arrangement of charges along the z-axis, specifically focusing on the potential at a point in the x, y-plane and its Laurent series expansion under the condition that the distance from the charges is much greater than their separation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss rewriting the expression for potential in terms of r and D, and consider approximations for the case where r is much larger than D. There are attempts to substitute variables and simplify the expression, leading to questions about dimensional consistency and the construction of a Laurent series.

Discussion Status

Some participants have made progress in rewriting the potential expression and are exploring how to derive the first two non-zero terms of the Laurent series. However, there is ongoing confusion regarding dimensional analysis and the correct formulation of the series expansion. Guidance has been offered to reconsider the expression and its simplifications.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There is a focus on ensuring that the mathematical expressions maintain dimensional consistency.

Mattkwish
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Consider a series of three charges arranged in a line along the z-axis, charges +Q at
z = D and charge -2Q at z = 0.
(a) Find the electrostatic potential at a point P in the x, y-plane at a distance r from
the center of the quadrupole.
(b) Assume r >> D. Find the first two non-zero terms of a Laurent series expansion
to the electrostatic potential you found in the fi rst part of this problem.
(c) A series of charges arranged in this way is called a linear quadrupole. Why?

I have already solved part (a) of the question, and found the electrostatic potential, Ue, to be

Ue = (2/4*pi*epsilon) * [(Q / \sqrt(x^2 + y^2)) - (Q / \sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + D^2))]

My next step was to divide by D^2 out of the square root so i can put the equation in a form that fits to a pre-solved integral sheet that we were handed.

Homework Equations



Ue = (2/4piε) * [(Q / √(x^2 + y^2)) - (Q / √(x^2 + y^2 + D^2))]



The Attempt at a Solution



For part (b) specifically, i am completely lost as to how to arrange the equation when r >> D.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Mattkwish and welcome to PF!

Try rewriting your expression for the potential in terms of r and D instead of x, y, and D.
Then think about how to make an approximation for r >> D.
 
Hi,

I attempted to substitute in r for x and y and established the substitution of (r0)^2 = x^2 + y^2. I then substituted in for r0, and was able to see that the bottom of one of the terms tends towards 0. So now i have the equation:

Ue = 2Q / 4piε * [1 - 1/r0] (the 1 / √r^2 + D^2 term goes towards 1/1)

However now i am lost as to how to construct a Laurent Series from this equation. My next step would be to use the equation (1/n!) * (d^nF / dz^n) |z=a and a similar one for the coefficients, however i am struggling with this. I remember using an integral to find the power series, which i could do for this function... could use some advice!
 
Mattkwish said:
Hi,

I attempted to substitute in r for x and y and established the substitution of (r0)^2 = x^2 + y^2. I then substituted in for r0, and was able to see that the bottom of one of the terms tends towards 0. So now i have the equation:

Ue = 2Q / 4piε * [1 - 1/r0] (the 1 / √r^2 + D^2 term goes towards 1/1)

This doesn't look right. Note that you have [1 - 1/r0]. The 1 has no dimensions while the 1/r0 has dimensions of 1/length. So, there is an inconsistency that shows something is wrong.

Let's go back to your expression

##V_e = (2/4\pi\epsilon) (Q / \sqrt{x^2 + y^2} - Q / \sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + D^2})##

I took the liberty of using ##V## for potential instead of ##U##, since that is the more common notation. Of course you can simplify the 2/4 and also factor out Q. What does the expression become after writing it in terms of ##r## but before making any simplifications?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K