Solving Charge Distribution for Spheres with Different Material Properties

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on solving charge distribution for three spheres with different material properties, specifically focusing on a sphere with a charge distribution that varies as rn. The challenge lies in defining a charge density ρ(r) that maintains consistent units while incorporating the r dependence. The proposed formula ρ(r) ∝ ρ0*(rn+1/rn) leads to unit inconsistencies, prompting further exploration of how to define ρ0 correctly. It is clarified that ρ0 can have arbitrary units as long as they balance in the integral equation ∫ ρ dV = Q, indicating that ρ may not strictly represent a conventional charge density. The conversation also touches on the use of LaTeX for formatting mathematical expressions in forum posts.
IxRxPhysicist
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hey all,
So the question in Jackson 1.4 is that I have 3 spheres that all have a total charge Q on them, but each sphere has different material properties. For instance, I have a conducting sphere, a sphere with a uniform charge distribution, and one with a charge distribution that has a charge distribution that varies as rn. It's the last one I am having trouble with, how can I get an r dependence in ρ without screwing up the units? I tried something like:

ρ(r) ∝ ρo*(rn+1/rn)

buuuuut that still leaves me some messed up units.

Also, ρ0 = 3Q/(4πr3)

Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can have \rho(r) = \rho_0 \, r^n, but the units of \rho_0 will not be \rm \frac{Coulombs}{cm^3}, they will be \rm \frac{Coulombs}{cm^{3+n}},. And then you have to determine \rho_0 by integrating the total charge over the sphere to give Q.
 
Whoa whoa ρ can take on arbitrary units? Like Coulombs/cm3+n? The units just have to balance out in ∫ ρ dV = Q?...Also as an aside, are you using LaTex or something because I like the format in your response.
 
Yes, \rho_0 is just a constant in your equations that can have whatever units it needs to to make the units come out right. In that case it's not a charge density any more.

This link shows you how to include latex in your posts.
 
Interesting, learned something new. I just learned mathematica so I guess I will put LaTex on my to do list. Thanks!
 
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...
Thread 'Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem'
Hi, I'm stuck at this question, please help. Attempt to the Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem (a) Electric Field and Potential at O due to Induced Charges $$V_O = 0$$ This potential is the sum of the potentials due to the real charges (##+q, -q##) and the induced charges on the sphere. $$V_O = V_{\text{real}} + V_{\text{induced}} = 0$$ - Electric Field at O, ##\vec{E}_O##: Since point O is inside a conductor in electrostatic equilibrium, the electric field there must be zero...