Potential of Infinite Charge Distribution by First Principle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the potential of an infinite line charge distribution using first principles, revealing challenges with setting the reference point for potential. The initial approach led to an indeterminate form, prompting a reevaluation of the potential's zero reference. The solution involves applying the Poisson equation and recognizing the symmetry in cylindrical coordinates, resulting in a logarithmic relationship for potential. The integration constants are determined using Gauss's Law, leading to a final expression for potential and electric field strength. The thread emphasizes the importance of correctly establishing the reference point in electrostatics for infinite charge distributions.
aim1732
Messages
428
Reaction score
2
We are presenting you a very perplexing but interesting problem
which you may have probably encountered in electrostatics.
We were trying to calculate the potential of an infinite line
charge distribution at a general point by first principle method i.e.
the usual integration of the potential of the differential charges on
the line charge extending from -∞ to +∞ .We got an indeterminate
form[ln(∞ )-ln(-∞)].
We realized that the reference for the potential can not be set to
infinity as we unknowingly did for the differential charge appearing
in the integration which is wrong for infinite charge
distributions.However we can not decide how to set the zero of
potential at some other point. Please help us...
Regards
aim1732 and Mayukh Nath.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This (and most other problems with a lot of symmetry) are most easily solved not by using the Green's function but by solving the Poisson equation from scratch.

Here we have

\Delta \Phi=-\rho=-\lambda \delta(r).

Here (\rho,\varphi,z) denote cylindrical coordinates and \lambda the charge per unit length located at the z axis.

For symmetry reasons \Phi depends on r only, and the Laplacian thus translates into

\Delta \Phi(r)=\frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \left (r \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial r} \right )=0 \quad \text{for} \quad r \neq 0.

Now one can succesively integrate up this equation, leading to

r \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial r}=C_1 \, \Rightarrow \, \Phi=C_1 \ln \left (\frac{r}{r_0} \right ).

Here C_1 and r_0 are integration constants. The first has to be chosen to get the correct singularity, while r_0 is physically irrelevant since it's only an additional constant, and the physically relevant quantity is the field strength, i.e.,

\vec{E}=-\vec{\nabla} \Phi=-\frac{C_1}{r} \vec{e}_r.

Now to get C_1 we apply Gauss's Law to a cylinder Z of height L and radius R around the z axis, leading to

\int_{\partial Z} \mathrm{dd} \vec{A} \cdot \vec{E}=-C_1 \int_{0}^{L} \mathrm{dd} z \int_0^{2 \pi} \mathrm{dd}\varphi=-2 \pi L C_1 \stackrel{!}{=}\lambda L.

Then you finally get the solution

\Phi=-\frac{\lambda}{2 \pi} \ln \left (\frac{r}{r_0} \right )

and

\vec{E}=\frac{\lambda}{2 \pi r} \vec{e}_r.
 
There are several ways to get phi.
The simplest is to get E by Gauss's law, and then integrate -E.dr from a radius a_0 (where you set phi(a_0)=0) to r.
You can also use the Coulomb integral by integrating
\phi(r)=\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}[\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+r^2}}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+a_0^2}}]. so \phi(a_0)=0.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top