I Question about divergence theorem and delta dirac function

Clara Chung
Messages
300
Reaction score
13
upload_2019-2-13_19-59-47.png

How do you prove 1.85 is valid for all closed surface containing the origin? (i.e. the line integral = 4pi for any closed surface including the origin)
 

Attachments

  • upload_2019-2-13_19-59-47.png
    upload_2019-2-13_19-59-47.png
    30.7 KB · Views: 4,834
Physics news on Phys.org
I would say by inspection, if you note that for a non-spherical surface the R would in fact be a function: ##R(r,\theta,\phi)## and that ##R(r,\theta,\phi)## factors cancel out using the rules of algebra, leaving an integral of angles only.

Since the ##R(r,\theta,\phi)## factors cancel, then you can choose R to be a spherical surface with no loss in generality.

Perhaps, @Mark44 or @fresh_42 have a more rigorous set of steps.
 
  • Like
Likes Clara Chung
Clara Chung said:
View attachment 238665
How do you prove 1.85 is valid for all closed surface containing the origin? (i.e. the line integral = 4pi for any closed surface including the origin)

You can use the divergence theorem. Take any volume that includes the origin. To avoid the problem at the origin you could remove a small spherical cavity at the origin. The total surface integral is zero and the surface integral of the small cavity is ##-4\pi##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Cryo, Clara Chung and jedishrfu
PeroK said:
You can use the divergence theorem. Take any volume that does not include the origin. To avoid the problem at the origin you could remove a small spherical cavity at the origin. The total surface integral is zero and the surface integral of the small cavity is ##-4\pi##.
upload_2019-2-14_0-47-2.png

How to get 1.100 from 1.99? I can't find the derivation in the book...
 

Attachments

  • upload_2019-2-14_0-47-2.png
    upload_2019-2-14_0-47-2.png
    25.3 KB · Views: 1,614
Clara Chung said:
View attachment 238678
How to get 1.100 from 1.99? I can't find the derivation in the book...

That's just a substitution ##\vec{r}## to ##\vec{r} - \vec{r'}##.
 
  • Like
Likes Clara Chung
PeroK said:
That's just a substitution ##\vec{r}## to ##\vec{r} - \vec{r'}##.
How do you do the substitution? Why is it ok to let ##\vec{r}## = ##\vec{r} - \vec{r'}## ? They are not equal..
 
Clara Chung said:
How do you do the substitution? Why is it ok to let ##\vec{r}## = ##\vec{r} - \vec{r'}## ? They are not equal..

In general, if ##f'(x) = g(x)##, then ##f'(x-a) = g(x-a)##. It's a simple application of the chain rule.
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
Back
Top