Potential energy of a continous charge distribution

asdf60
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
How exactly does one find the potential energy of a charge distribution? More precisely, how does one get over the 1/r term in the integral goes crazy near r=0? Purcell says it is possible, but I'm not seeing how for an continuous distribution this is possible.

Consider for a line of length L with linear charge density p. Let's start just by finding the potential at on end of the line. It should be integral from 0 to L of (p*dx / x). Needless to say, the integral doesn't exist. What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The line has to have finite cross-section, otherwise the integral blows up. Moreover, you can only assign a potential to objects of finite charge and dimensions.
 
what about for something like a conducting volume, where the charge is distributed over the surface (and hence density is in terms of area not volume)?
 
Last edited:
Again, the surface has to have finite thickness. If you have some charge distribution spread over some region in space, then that region must have finite dimensions, or else you'll get places with infinite charge density (charge to volume ratio), and the integral over such 'singularities' will blow up.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top