Potential of a point from charged rod.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the calculation of electric potential from a charged rod, specifically addressing the integration limits when evaluating the potential along the x-axis. The user encountered two different results from integrating the function dx/x, leading to confusion over the correct limits. The resolution involves understanding that the integration must be performed from negative to positive limits, which affects the logarithmic results derived from the integration. This highlights the importance of consistent variable substitution in integration processes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric potential and charge distributions
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically integration techniques
  • Knowledge of logarithmic functions and their properties
  • Basic concepts of electric fields and forces
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of electric potential from continuous charge distributions
  • Learn advanced integration techniques in calculus, focusing on variable substitution
  • Explore the properties of logarithmic functions and their applications in physics
  • Review examples of electric field calculations from charged rods and other geometries
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone involved in advanced calculus applications in physics.

Piyu
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hello, the problem i have with finding the potential is the integration limits. Assuming both the rod and point lies on the x axis. When i integrate the sum of many slices of rod, ill get 2 answers(negative and positive) depending on the limits i use.

Example i ended up integrating dx/x which means that if i set the far end of the rod as lower limit ill end up with ln(x/L+x) instead of ln((L+x)/X).

So the question is which of it is true and is there a standard way to approach this?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Piyu! :smile:
Piyu said:
Example i ended up integrating dx/x which means that if i set the far end of the rod as lower limit ill end up with ln(x/L+x) instead of ln((L+x)/X).

One is minus the other (logs of inverses) …

and the minus comes because you should have replaced dx by d(-x) if you went the other way! :wink:
 
AH! So whenever i integrate over a variable like dx, it has to go from negative to positive(the right way). Never knew that :P Thanks for the help appreciate it!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K