Method of images: region of interest

  • Thread starter Thread starter lys04
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the method of images in electrostatics, particularly focusing on the concept of the region of interest in relation to conducting shells and the placement of image charges. Participants explore how the placement of real charges and image charges affects the application of Poisson's equations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the definition of the region of interest, questioning how it changes based on the location of real and image charges. They discuss scenarios involving spherical conducting shells and the implications of placing image charges inside or outside the conductor.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the uniqueness theorem and its relation to the method of images. Some participants express confusion regarding the implications of image charge placement on Poisson's equation, while others clarify the conditions under which the uniqueness theorem applies.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the assumptions regarding the distribution of charge and the implications for the potential in different regions. Participants are considering the effects of real charges on the electrostatic field and the conditions necessary for applying the uniqueness theorem.

lys04
Messages
144
Reaction score
5
Homework Statement
What does region of interest mean?
Relevant Equations
Poisson’s equation
I always thought region of interest is everything outside the conductor, which works when the image charges are placed inside the conductor. But sometimes the image charges are placed outside of the conductor instead which clearly changes Poisson’s equations since rho is now different?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Say you have a spherical conducting shell of finite radius ##R## which is an equipotential. Put the origin at the center of the shell. Don't forget that you have another equipotential surface at infinity where the potential is usually defined to be zero. Now consider point P at ##r<R##. Is it inside or outside the equipotential surfaces at ##R## and at infinity?

The region of interest is the region where the real charge is placed at point Q. Any other point P that can be reached from Q without crossing a conducting boundary is in the region of interest. So if Q is at ##r<R##, the region of interest is ##r<R##; if Q is at ##r>R##, the region of interest is ##r>R.##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21
kuruman said:
Say you have a spherical conducting shell of finite radius ##R## which is an equipotential. Put the origin at the center of the shell. Don't forget that you have another equipotential surface at infinity where the potential is usually defined to be zero. Now consider point P at ##r<R##. Is it inside or outside the equipotential surfaces at ##R## and at infinity?

The region of interest is the region where the real charge is placed at point Q. Any other point P that can be reached from Q without crossing a conducting boundary is in the region of interest. So if Q is at ##r<R##, the region of interest is ##r<R##; if Q is at ##r>R##, the region of interest is ##r>R.##
Ohh alright this makes sense. We were doing examples of having a point charge at x=a outside a sphere of radius R with constant potential and that the image charge should be placed at a position of x=R^2/a. This suggests that it’s possible for the image charge to be outside which is what made me confused because then wouldn’t rho in Poisson’s equation be different. But when the image charge is outside this means the real charge is inside the conductor so the region of interest is only r<R and Poisson’s equation isn’t changed.
 
Oh and by the Uniqueness theorem, the placement of image charges are unique too right?
 
lys04 said:
Oh and by the Uniqueness theorem, the placement of image charges are unique too right?
No. The uniqueness theorem for the region of interest only involves the real charges. In order to invoke the uniqueness theorem for the images you would have to assume things about the solution outside the region in which the problem is to be solved.

For example, the way that the conductor actually compensates to create an equipotential surface is by rearranging a surface charge. Compare to solving a spherically symmetric scenario outside of some radius R. It doesn’t matter how the charge is distributed inside R, as long as the total charge is the same, the field outside R will be the same.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21 and SammyS
lys04 said:
Oh and by the Uniqueness theorem, the placement of image charges are unique too right?
You could reason this out yourself.

Suppose you place charge ##q## off-center inside a grounded conducting shell at ##r<R.## The potential inside the region of interest is the same as if there were no shell and image charge ##q'## is placed at ##r'>R## as specified by the method of images.

Now place real charge ##q'## at the same distance ##r'>R## as in the previous case and no charge at ##r<R##. There will be an image charge ##q''## at ##r''<R## that makes the grounded shell an equipotential as specified by the method of images.

Would the image charge ##q''## and its position be the same as in the previous case, i.e. ##q''=q## and ##r=r''##? Why or why not?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K