Solve Gauss' Law: Volume Charge Density in Region r > a

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves applying Gauss' Law to find the volume charge density in a region defined by an electric field in spherical coordinates for r > a. The electric field components are provided, and the divergence of the electric field is central to the discussion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss calculating the divergence of the electric field and its implications for the volume charge density. Some express confusion over the significance of the region r > a and the correctness of their divergence calculations.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing examination of the divergence calculations, with some participants questioning their own results and others suggesting potential misunderstandings regarding the coordinate system. The discussion reflects a mix of interpretations and attempts to clarify the mathematical approach without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of information about the physical setup or diagrams, which may contribute to confusion. The distinction between the angles theta and phi in spherical coordinates is also under scrutiny, as different conventions may lead to different interpretations of the divergence formula.

EricVT
Messages
165
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement



An electric field in the region r > a is given by

E,r = 2*A*cos(theda)/r^3
E,theda = A*sin(theda)/r^3
E,phi = 0
A = constant

Find the volume charge density in this region.

E,r and E,theda and E,phi are the components of E in the r, theda, and phi directions, respectively.

Homework Equations



div E = p/eo

p = volume charge density
E = electric field
eo = permittivity of free space
div is divergence

The Attempt at a Solution



Well, I started by calculating the divergence of E in spherical coordinates and got that it is equal to zero. So p/eo = 0 ==> p = 0?

This isn't correct, so I'm confused on what I need to do. Does r > a have some significance? It gives no information about what sort of volume this is or what a is, and there are no diagrams or anything.

Thanks for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I tried calculating the divergence, and I didn't get zero. I won't guarantee I'm right, but it sure doesn't look like it can cancel to zero unless you are working at a particular point?
 
Well let me write out my work here and maybe I can catch my mistake.

div E = (1/r^2)*d(r^2*E,r)/dr + (1/[r*sin(theda)])*d(sin(theda)*E,theda))/d(theda) + ...

I won't write out the phi term because E,phi = zero so it is just zero.

div E = (1/r^2)*d(2Acos(theda)/r))/dr + (1/[r*sin(theda)])*d(Asin^2(theda)/r^3))/d(theda)

div E = (1/r^2)(-2*A*cos(theda)/r^2) + (1/[r*sin(theda)])(2Asin(theda)cos(theda)/r^3)

div E = -2Acos(theda)/r^4 + 2Acos(theda)/r^4 = 0

Hmm, I'm not catching my mistake if I did make one.
 
EricVT said:
Well let me write out my work here and maybe I can catch my mistake.

div E = (1/r^2)*d(r^2*E,r)/dr + (1/[r*sin(theda)])*d(sin(theda)*E,theda))/d(theda) + ...

you have the formula wrong here... check the divergence formula for spherical coordinates carefully...
 
Ah, ha. Ok, so theta is the polar angle and phi is the equatorial one? I was taking it the other way around (I've seen it both ways). If so then I agree it is zero. But if you say that isn't correct, then are you sure you have them right?
 
[tex]\nabla \cdot A = \frac {1}{r^2} \frac {\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 A_{r}) \ +\ \frac {1}{r sin \theta} \frac {\partial}{\partial \theta} (sin \theta A_{\theta}) \ +\ \frac {1}{r sin \theta} \frac {\partial A_{\phi}}{\partial \phi}[/tex]


This is what is written in the reference section of my text for the divergence in spherical coordinates. Is this wrong?
 
If that's from the same text as the problem, then we can assume the same conventions are being used. In that case, yes, the divergence and the local charge density are zero. Whatever is saying that isn't correct, isn't correct. I think the r>a part just means you can assume you are not at the origin where things become singular.
 
Is the problem from the text?
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K