Mistake in "Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory"?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a potential misunderstanding related to the notation used in a textbook on electromagnetic theory, specifically regarding the divergence of polarization in dielectric materials.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions the notation used in the book regarding the divergence of polarization, expressing confusion over the use of different terms such as ##\rho_P## and ##-div' P##. Some participants clarify that the differences are merely notational rather than substantive.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the notation and its implications, with some providing reassurance that the original poster's question is valid and has been addressed. There is a recognition of the value of asking questions in the learning process.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a lack of external verification from the professor and the absence of a visual reference from the class board, which may contribute to the original poster's uncertainty.

MatinSAR
Messages
673
Reaction score
204
Homework Statement
I guess there is a problem with this book in chapter 4.
Relevant Equations
Below.
The book wanna show how to find potential of a dielectric.
1705268734962.png

The problem arises when it uses a vector identity.
1705268822382.png

Still there is no problem.

1705268911641.png

My problem is that I cannot understand why ##\rho_P= -div P##? I think it should be ##-div' P##.
The book is wrong?

In next page it uses ##-div'##
1705269070906.png


In some other pages it uses ##div P## and this confuesd me ...
My professor didn't say anything about book being wrong in this chapter and I did not take a photo of class board. So I don't have any trusted source except here ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
P is a function of position. Inside the integral, one is integrating in prime coordinates, so P is a function of prime coordinates. The book is correct. It‘s just notation, not physics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TSny and MatinSAR
Frabjous said:
P is a function of position. Inside the integral, one is integrating in prime coordinates, so P is a function of prime coordinates. The book is correct. It‘s just notation, not physics.
Now I see what a poor question I've asked. Thanks @Frabjous .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and Frabjous
Not a poor question. A simple and resolved question! 👍
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS and MatinSAR
hutchphd said:
Not a poor question. A simple and resolved question! 👍
Thanks for your kind comment @hutchphd .
 
The question was well stated and the answer was simple. If only this was always true! Consider the time you would have needlessly wasted had you not asked the question. Confusion almost always preceeds (useful) learning.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz and MatinSAR
hutchphd said:
Confusion almost always preceeds (useful) learning.
Any time I've ever succeded in figuring something out it was always preceded by a state of confusion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MatinSAR

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
826
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K