Proving Lorentz Condition for Retarded Potentials in Griffith 10.8

  • Thread starter Thread starter stunner5000pt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potentials
stunner5000pt
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


Griffith's problem 10.8
Show that retarded potentials satisfy the Lorentz condition. Hint proceed as follows
a) Show that
\nabla\cdot\left(\frac{J}{R}\right)=\frac{1}{R}\left(\nabla\cdot\vec{J}\right)+\frac{1}{R}\left(\nabla '\cdot\vec{J}\right)-\nabla '\cdot\left(\frac{J}{R}\right)
b) Show that \nabla\cdot\vec{J}=-\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial\vec{J}}{\partial t_{r}}\cdot(\nabla R)
c) Note that \vec{J}=\vec{J}\left(\vec{r'},t_{r}\right)
\nabla '\cdot J=-\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}-\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial J}{\partial t_{r}}\cdot (\nabla ' R)

where \vec{R}=\vec{r}-\vec{r'}

2. The attempt at a solution

I managed to do the first and second parts but its the third part that i am unable to prove.
Ok so i know that \vec{J}=\vec{J}\left(\vec{r'},t_{r}\right)=\vec{J}\left(\vec{r'},t-\frac{\vec{r}-\vec{r'}}{c}\right)

To make it simpler for me to understand let's do it for one dimension.
\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'} = \frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial t_{r}}\frac{\partial t_{r}}{\partial x'}
But \frac{\partial t_{r}}{\partial x'}=\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial R}{\partial x'}
so \frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'} = \frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial t_{r}}\frac{\partial R}{\partial x'}

THat explains the second term which i need to get in the proof. But how do i get the first term?

Also is it supposed to be \nabla\cdot J=-\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}
or is it supposed to be \nabla'\cdot J=-\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the product rules:
\vec \nabla \cdot \left(\frac{\vec J}{R}\right) = {1\over R}\left(\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec J\right) + \vec J \cdot \vec{\nabla} \left({1\over R}\right)

\vec{\nabla}' \cdot \left(\frac{\vec J}{R}\right) = {1\over R}\left(\vec{\nabla}' \cdot \vec J\right) + \vec J \cdot \vec{\nabla}' \left({1\over R}\right)

Where:

\vec R = \vec r -\vec{r}'

\vec \nabla ({1\over R}) = -\vec{\nabla}' ({1\over R})
 
Last edited:
i cna use that part for the first two
but i cannot get the second part to work

while i was asleep i thought of something though

does this work? I have clearly forgotten how to apply chain rule...

\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'}=\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'}+\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial t_{r}}\frac{\partial t_{r}}{\partial x'}\frac{\partial x}{\partial x'}

is this correct??
 
stunner5000pt said:
i cna use that part for the first two
but i cannot get the second part to work

while i was asleep i thought of something though

does this work? I have clearly forgotten how to apply chain rule...

\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'}=\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial x'}+\frac{\partial J_{x}}{\partial t_{r}}\frac{\partial t_{r}}{\partial x'}\frac{\partial x}{\partial x'}

is this correct??

I will show you the steps for \vec \nabla \cdot \vec J

\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial x} = -{1\over c}\frac{\partial R}{\partial x}

So,
\vec \nabla \cdot \vec J = \frac{\partial J_x}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial J_y}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial J_z}{\partial z}

= \frac{\partial J_x}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial J_y}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial J_z}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial z}

= -{1\over c} \frac{\partial \vec {J}}{\partial t_r}\cdot (\vec \nabla R)

Can you prove the same for Div J'?
 
Last edited:
Reshma said:
I will show you the steps for \vec \nabla \cdot \vec J

\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial x} = -{1\over c}\frac{\partial R}{\partial x}

So,
\vec \nabla \cdot \vec J = \frac{\partial J_x}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial J_y}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial J_z}{\partial z}

= \frac{\partial J_x}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial J_y}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial J_z}{\partial t_r}\frac{\partial t_r}{\partial z}

= -{1\over c} \frac{\partial \vec {J}}{\partial t_r}\cdot (\vec \nabla R)

Can you prove the same for Div J'?

I got it now thanks a lot
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top