Separation of Variables In Electrostatics

AI Thread Summary
Separation of Variables is a common technique in electrostatics, but concerns arise regarding the legitimacy of solutions, particularly when portions of the solution are discarded to avoid division by zero. This raises questions about whether important aspects of the solution are overlooked. Additionally, when using Fourier Series to find constants, the reliance on potential at a single point creates uncertainty about the applicability of that constant across the entire space. While some justification exists for ignoring certain solutions, a deeper mathematical understanding may be necessary to fully grasp these concepts. Clarification on the consistency of constants across space remains a key inquiry.
M-Speezy
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I am curious how legitimate a solution Separation of Variables tends to give. I've been working problems out of Griffith's book on Electromagnetism, and am often uneasy as to the way things are done. I have two specific issues. The first, is that in spherical it is often necessary to remove entire portions of the solution, as you would divide by zero otherwise. This makes perfect sense at surface level, because otherwise the solution wouldn't make any sense. But how do you know that is then the solution, that you haven't left off important parts? The other issue I have is with finding the constants through a Fourier Series. Often, the potential would be given at a specific point, so everything is simplified to be analyzed at JUST that specific point, so that the constant can be found. My question is how do we know that the constant found at that point will apply to all space (that is being considered)? It all 'makes sense', but seems very dubious to me. If anyone would be able to explain some of these ideas, or maybe why I'm perhaps being silly, I would really appreciate it. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I may have answered one of my questions, the one about ignoring portions of solutions. Griffiths discusses the fact that sines or cosines can be used to construct any solution, so it is somehow justifiable. I think to understand it at a deeper level I'd be looking at a lot of math. My other question still stands, if anyone knows anything about it!
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top