Potential vector of a oscilating dipole:

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the electric potential of an oscillating dipole as presented in Griffiths' Electrodynamics. Participants explore the transition from one term to another in the context of the time variable t_o, defined as t - r/c. The use of the chain rule is emphasized, particularly in calculating the derivatives of the dipole moment components with respect to spatial coordinates. The conversation clarifies that the gradient operator can be expressed in terms of the time derivative, leading to the conclusion that the x-component of the gradient involves the second derivative of the dipole moment. Overall, the thread delves into the mathematical intricacies of the oscillating dipole's electric potential.
LCSphysicist
Messages
644
Reaction score
162
Homework Statement
I.
Relevant Equations
.
I am passing through some difficulties to understand the reasoning to derive the electric potential of an oscilating dipole used by Griffths at his Electrodynamics book:
Knowing that ##t_o = t - r/c##,
Captura de tela de 2022-05-13 07-55-47.png

What exactly he has used here to go from the first term after "and hence" to the second term? (The one involving ##\ddot p##). Maybe ##\nabla = \nabla t_o \frac{d}{dt_o}## ? But this does not make sense.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A straightforward, but somewhat tedious, method is to work in cartesian coordinates.

Consider the ##x##-component of ##\nabla \left[ \frac {\mathbf{\hat r} \cdot \mathbf{ \dot p}(t_0)}{r} \right]##:

$$\left(\nabla \left[ \frac {\mathbf{\hat r} \cdot \mathbf{ \dot p}(t_0)}{r} \right]\right)_x = \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \left[ \frac{x}{r^2} \dot p_x(t_0) + \frac{y}{r^2} \dot p_y(t_0) +\frac{z}{r^2} \dot p_z(t_0) \right]$$
Expand this out. You can drop terms that fall off faster than ##1/r##.

When calculating ##\large \frac{\partial \dot p_x(t_0)}{\partial x}##, recall that ##t_0 = t-r/c =t-\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}/c##. So, you can use the chain rule to write $$ \frac{\partial \dot p_x(t_0)}{\partial x} = \frac{d \dot p_x}{dt_0} \frac{\partial t_0}{\partial x}$$
Likewise for dealing with ##\large \frac{\partial \dot p_y(t_0)}{\partial x}## and ##\large \frac{\partial \dot p_z(t_0)}{\partial x}##.

You should find that
$$\left(\nabla \left[ \frac {\mathbf{\hat r} \cdot \mathbf{ \dot p}(t_0)}{r} \right]\right)_x = \left( \frac {\mathbf{\hat{r}}}{r} \cdot \mathbf{\ddot p}(t_0)\right) \frac{\partial t_0}{\partial x}$$
Similar results are obtained for the ##y## and ##z## components of ##\nabla \left[ \frac {\mathbf{\hat r} \cdot \mathbf{ \dot p}(t_0)}{r} \right]##.
 
Herculi said:
Homework Statement:: I.
Relevant Equations:: .

Maybe ∇=∇toddto ? But this does not make sense.
Yes it does. That is just the chain rule:
$$
[\nabla \dot{\vec p}(t_0)]_{ij} = \frac{\partial \dot p^j(t_0)}{\partial x^i} = \frac{d \dot p^j}{dt_0}\frac{\partial t_0}{\partial x^i} = \ddot{p}^j(t_0) \partial_i t_0.
$$
 
Last edited:
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top