Potential from a simple Quadrupole expansion

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the potential due to a quadrupole moment from a specific charge distribution. Participants explore different methods for deriving the potential and express concerns about inconsistencies in the results obtained from these methods.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes two methods for calculating the quadrupole potential, noting that one method yields a result with no angular dependence while the other introduces angular dependence through spherical harmonics.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the formula used for the potential, suggesting it does not appear correct.
  • A third participant provides a link to a derivation of the quadrupole moment potential, clarifying a term used in the original post.
  • One participant asserts that the only non-zero component of the quadrupole moment tensor is Q_zz due to the alignment of the charges along the z-axis, leading to a simplification in the potential calculation.
  • Another participant challenges the interpretation of the unit vectors in the potential formula, arguing that the z component of the vector r can vary and does not necessarily imply that the unit vectors are solely in the z direction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the potential calculations and the interpretation of the components involved. There is no consensus on the correctness of the methods or the results derived from them.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential misunderstandings regarding the definitions of terms and the assumptions made in the calculations, particularly concerning the angular dependence of the potential and the nature of the unit vectors.

khfrekek92
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone! I'm currently working on this problem for which I am getting inconsistencies depending on how I do it. I'm trying to find the potential due to the quadrupole moment of the following distribution:
+q at (0,0,d), -2q at (0,0,0), and +q at (0,0,-2d)

I am doing this using two different methods and they both get different answers:1) Using the general expansion Qij=sum[ql{3ril*rjl-rl^2deltaij)] and plugging into Vquad=1/(8*pi*epsilonor^3)sum[Qij*ni*nj]

This method gives me some constant divided by r^3, with NO angular dependence whatsoever.2) Going back to the basics and using the very general potential by substituting in the addition theorem for spherical harmonics, etc to find the general potential for a general multipole moment: qlm=integral[rho*r^l*Ylm],
and
Vmulti=sum[1/(epsilono(r^(l+1)*(2l+1)*Ylm(theta,phi)*qlm]

Notice how this answer definitely depends on theta for dipole moment and above (when the spherical harmonics introduce cos(theta)'s into them.)

Doing it this method gives me the same constant divided by r^3 that I found earlier, except now it is multiplied by (3cos^2(theta)-1) which comes from exactly the Y20 spherical harmonic. These two methods SHOULD give the same results, but these are radically different... Any ideas?

Thanks!

PS sorry for the lack of Latex, but I figured most people should get the gist of it
 
Physics news on Phys.org
khfrekek92 said:
This method gives me some constant divided by r^3, with NO angular dependence whatsoever.
Where does the formula for the potential come from? It does not look right.

What is "epsilonor"?
 
You can see it derived here:
http://physicspages.com/2012/04/03/quadrupole-moment/

And sorry, epsilonor is just from my lack of latex understanding.. it is really supposed to be the vacuum constant times the magnitude of r:

ε*|r|
 
So ni*nj are the components of the vector r? Well, then your potential should depend on the direction of r.
If it does not, please show your work.
 
Yes that is correct. However, because all 3 charges are on the z axis, the only non-zero component of the quadrupole moment tensor is Q_zz. Every other one goes to 0.

Then, only one term will be in the potential summation, the Q_zz term. This term corresponds to nz*nz (which are two unit vectors in the z direction) which boils down to 1.
 
Those are not the unit vectors! The "unit" here refers to the whole vector r, its z component can be smaller.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K