Question about Coloumb's law notation and math in two different textbooks

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences in notation and mathematical representation of Coulomb's law as presented in two different textbooks: Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics" and Griffiths' textbook. Participants explore the implications of these notational differences for understanding the underlying physics, particularly in the context of graduate-level Electricity and Magnetism.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that Jackson modifies the notation to include a cube of the magnitude in the denominator, which they find mathematically awkward and seeks clarification on the equivalence of the two forms.
  • Another participant asserts that Jackson's formulation is clearer and provides a rewritten version of the formula to illustrate the equivalence with Griffiths' notation.
  • A later reply mentions that the form ##{\bf r}/r^3## is more convenient for taking vector derivatives, suggesting a practical advantage of Jackson's notation.
  • Another participant introduces the idea of using spherical coordinates, indicating that the notation can be adapted to different coordinate systems with position-dependent vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the clarity and convenience of the notations used in Jackson and Griffiths. While some find Jackson's approach clearer, others may not share this view, indicating that multiple perspectives on the effectiveness of the notations remain.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the importance of understanding the definitions and representations of vectors in different contexts, which may depend on the specific coordinate systems used. The discussion does not resolve the question of which notation is superior.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for graduate students studying Electricity and Magnetism, particularly those transitioning from undergraduate texts to more advanced materials, as well as educators looking for insights into common student challenges with notation.

Selectron09
Messages
20
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Trying to understand mathematically how Jackson Classical Electrodynamics and Griffiths both describe coloumb's law equation
I am currently taking Electricity and Magnetism I for Graduate school and we are of course using Jackson Classical Electrodynamics 3e. I am used to Griffiths from undergrad and intro physics in that they describe it:
1694274144420.png


But Jackson modifies the notation to include a cube of the magnitude in the denominator:
1694274419944.png


I have tried to wrap my head around it. My professor just said it makes it "less mathematically akward" which is fine. Can someone take me stepwise line by line why these two are the same? I would really appreciate it. I want to be sure that I am getting used to the notation early of Jackson as I hear that's the trickiest part. It's not "new" physics!
 

Attachments

  • 1694273807045.png
    1694273807045.png
    19.9 KB · Views: 107
  • 1694274310407.png
    1694274310407.png
    19.1 KB · Views: 111
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course, Jackson has it in the clearest way. It's just giving the force between two point charges at given positions. Of course it's the same as in Griffiths's book. You only have to look up the definition of ##\vec{r}##. That becomes clear by rewriting the Jackson formula in the following way
$$\vec{F}=\frac{k q_1 q_2}{|\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2|^2} \frac{\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2}{|\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2} \equiv \frac{k q_1 q_2}{r^2} \hat{r},$$
where ##\vec{r}=vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2## and ##\hat{r}=\vec{r}/|\vec{r}|##.

I'd also have written ##\vec{F}_1## for the force, because it's the force on charge 1 due to the presence of charge 2. Of course, you get ##\vec{F}_2=-\vec{F}_1## as it should be for static fields.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Selectron09
Thankyou very much. That was amazingly helpful and gets me on the right track now as I continue through the reading. Much gratitude and I shall not hesitate to come back again after I've struggled through it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz and vanhees71
The form ##{\bf r}/r^3## is more convenient for taking vector derivatives like grad, div, curl.
 
You can also work in, e.g., spherical coordinates. Then you work with vector components wrt. the according (position-dependent) vectors ##\vec{e}_r##, ##\vec{e}_{\vartheta}##, and ##\vec{e}_{\varphi}##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
Replies
58
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K