Mistake in "Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory"?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around a potential misunderstanding in the "Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory" regarding the notation used for the divergence of polarization, specifically questioning why ##\rho_P = -\text{div} P## is used instead of ##-\text{div}' P##. Participants clarify that the book's notation is correct and that the confusion stems from integrating in prime coordinates, where P is indeed a function of those coordinates. The consensus is that the issue is one of notation rather than a fundamental error in the physics presented. The conversation highlights the importance of asking questions to resolve confusion, which often leads to deeper understanding.
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 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 berkeman and Frabjous
Not a poor question. A simple and resolved question! 👍
 
  • Like
Likes 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 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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
541
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
405
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K