Potential, field, Laplacian and Spherical Coordinates

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a spherically symmetric potential function V(r) expressed as a polynomial in terms of r, specifically within a sphere of radius R. Participants are examining the relationship between the potential and the electric field, particularly through the gradient operator in spherical coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the gradient operator in spherical coordinates to compute the electric field from the potential. There is a focus on whether the simplification to an ordinary derivative is valid given the form of V(r). Questions arise about the completeness of the gradient expression and the implications of the spherical symmetry.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants seeking clarification on the gradient expression and its application. There is a recognition of differing interpretations regarding the simplification of the gradient operator, but no consensus has been reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the reluctance to share the exact homework problem details, indicating a desire to maintain academic integrity while still seeking guidance on the approach to the problem.

AdkinsJr
Messages
148
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement





Say I am given a spherically symmetric potential function V(r), written in terms of r and a bunch of other constants, and say it is just a polynomial of some type with r as the variable, [tex]\frac{q}{4\pi\varepsilon_o}P(r)[/tex], and we are inside the sphere of radius R, so r<R…


Homework Equations



[tex]\vec E =-\vec\nabla V[/tex]

The operator should reduce since there is are no components for phi or theta, so in spherical
[tex]\vec\nabla =\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\hat r[/tex]

So is it that simple? Just compute the gradient?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your expression doesn't make much sense, at least I don't understand it. The gradient in spherical coordinates reads
[tex]\vec{\nabla} V=\vec{e}_r \partial_r V + \vec{e}_{\vartheta} \frac{1}{r} \partial_{\vartheta} V + \vec{e}_{\varphi} \frac{1}{r \sin \vartheta} \partial_{\varphi} V.[/tex]
Now you can calculate the gradient of the potential, which is the electric field.
 
The expression I gave was just meant to be the operator, not the actual gradient, but I omitted the other terms of the operator because my function is of the form [tex]V(r)=\frac{q}{4\pi \varepsilon_o}P(r)[/tex] where P(r) is just a polynomial with r as the only variable. So infact the operator would be an ordinary derivative, so can I just apply [tex]\frac{d}{dr}\hat r[/tex] to V(r) to get my field?

The question is arising from a homework problem although I don't really want to post the exact problem on the net, it's not from a textbook or anything. He has just given us this function V(r) and I was just skeptical about the approach I was taking to find the field.
 
As I said, I don't understand your expression. If [itex]\hat{r}=\vec{e}_r[/itex] is the unit vector in [itex]r[/itex] direction then its derivative wrt. [itex]r[/itex] is obviously 0. The gradient in spherical coordinates is as given in my previous posting.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K