Showing that Laplace's equation holds

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cole A.
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laplace's equation
Cole A.
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



(From Plonsey, R. and R. C. Barr, "Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach")

Show
[tex]\nabla^2 r = 0[/tex]
given
[tex]r = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2}.[/tex]

Homework Equations


[tex]\nabla = \frac{\partial}{\partial x}{\bf i} + \frac{\partial}{\partial y}{\bf j} + \frac{\partial}{\partial z}{\bf k}[/tex] (the "abuse of notation")


The Attempt at a Solution



This is my first attempt at a post on this forum, and I'm embarrassed to say I'm really struggling with this question. (Not a homework problem per se, just an in-text side note). It has been a good while since I've studied vector calculus, so if somebody could point out my error, I would appreciate it.

Beginning with
[tex] \begin{equation}<br /> r = (x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}<br /> \end{equation}[/tex]
taking the gradient results in
[tex] \begin{equation}<br /> \begin{aligned}<br /> \nabla r &= \frac{\partial r}{\partial x} {\bf i} + \frac{\partial r}{\partial y} {\bf j} + \frac{\partial r}{\partial z} {\bf k} \\<br /> &= \left[ \frac{x}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right]{\bf i} + \left[ \frac{y}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right]{\bf j} + \left[ \frac{z}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right]{\bf k}.<br /> \end{aligned}<br /> \end{equation}[/tex]
Now taking the divergence of this gradient [itex]-[/itex] which amounts cumulatively to taking the Laplacian of [itex]r -[/itex] gives
[tex] \begin{equation}<br /> \begin{aligned}<br /> \nabla \cdot \nabla r &= \nabla^2 r \\<br /> &= \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left[ \frac{x}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right] + \frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left[ \frac{y}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right] + \frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left[ \frac{z}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} \right] \\<br /> &= \left[ \frac{1}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} - \frac{x^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] + \left[ \frac{1}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} - \frac{y^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] + \left[ \frac{1}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}} - \frac{z^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] \\<br /> &= \left[ \frac{y^2 + z^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] + \left[ \frac{x^2 + z^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] + \left[ \frac{x^2 + y^2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{3/2}} \right] \\<br /> &= \frac{2}{(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)^{1/2}}<br /> \end{aligned}<br /> \end{equation}[/tex]
which is not zero, although I very much wish it was. (Sorry for the long-winded calculations.)
 
Very good job. You got the right answer. I think the problem is with the original question. The laplacian of r isn't zero. The laplacian of 1/r is zero. Are you sure that's not what it says??
 
Ugh, I was starting to suspect I was wasting time because of a typo in the book. I attached the relevant portion of the textbook page as an image, where the above equality is listed along with a couple other vector identities.

Thanks for the extra input (and sanity check).
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    16 KB · Views: 544
Last edited:
Cole A. said:
Ugh, I was starting to suspect I was wasting time because of a typo in the book. I attached the relevant portion of the textbook page as an image, where the above equality is listed along with a couple other vector identities.

Thanks for the extra input.

It's a typo alright. Pretty bad one too. Jeez. I'm aghast. Shocked, really. That's pretty fundamental, you'd think they would have checked that.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K