Solve Gauss's Law for D: Electric Displacement of Sphere with Polarization kr

  • Thread starter Thread starter fayled
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gauss's law Law
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 2K views
fayled
Messages
176
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


We have a sphere with a polarization kr. I need to show that the electric displacement D=0 everywhere.

Homework Equations


∫closed surfaceD.dS=qfree

The Attempt at a Solution


qfree=0 everywhere so the flux of D is zero everywhere. Clearly D=0 everywhere does solve this, but so could possibly many other things - how do I show D=0 is the solution? This is a very niggly and annoying to think about! Thanks for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You only need to consider the spherical symmetry. Because of that, D is radial and can only depend on r and because you're integrating on a sphere, you're not integrating w.r.t. r and so the integrand is a constant.So we have [itex]\int D \hat{r}\cdot dS\hat r=0 \Rightarrow D\int dS=0 \Rightarrow D 4 \pi R^2=0 \Rightarrow D=0[/itex].
 
Shyan said:
You only need to consider the spherical symmetry. Because of that, D is radial and can only depend on r and because you're integrating on a sphere, you're not integrating w.r.t. r and so the integrand is a constant.So we have [itex]\int D \hat{r}\cdot dS\hat r=0 \Rightarrow D\int dS=0 \Rightarrow D 4 \pi R^2=0 \Rightarrow D=0[/itex].

Ah that was a bit silly of me, thanks.

Another question regarding the D field. My book says that in a homogenous linear dielectric, ∇.D=ρf (free charge density) and ∇xD=0 (I'm fine with that). Then it says D can be found from the free charge just as though the dielectric were not there so D=ε0Evac (where Evac is the field the same free charge distribution would produce in the absence of any dielectric). Then it goes on from here to prove that in such a medium, the vacuum field is reduced by a factor of the relative permittivity, which I'm fine with. I really don't get the reasoning behind the jump from the divergence and curl to D being found as though no dielectric were there. It sort of comes after a discussion about the parallel between E and D.