Stuck on divergence of electric field

betelgeuse91
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For a volume charge, ##\textbf{E}(\textbf{r}) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\int_{all space}\frac{\hat{\gamma}}{\gamma^2}\rho(r')d\tau'##
and I am trying to get the divergence of it.

Homework Equations


The book says
##\nabla\cdot\textbf{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\int_{all space}[\nabla\cdot(\frac{\hat{\gamma}}{\gamma^2})]\rho(r')d\tau'##

The Attempt at a Solution


I am wondering why it is not
##\nabla\cdot\textbf{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\int_{all space}[\nabla\cdot(\frac{\hat{\gamma}}{\gamma^2}\rho(r'))]d\tau'##
when taking ##\nabla## inside the integral, because if it should be this way,
then we need to apply the product rule of divergence. (I guess it's not the case)
Can somebody please explain why the divergence inside does not include the charge density function?
Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The electric field at a point P with position vector ##\vec r## is the integral of the contribution of all charge elements dq. Those contributions depend on the distance of the charge element from the point P. That distance is denoted by γ in your formula. ##\gamma =\vec r- \vec r' ##, ##\hat \gamma =\frac{\vec r- \vec r'}{|\vec r- \vec r'|}##.
You need the divergence with respect to ##\vec {r}##, while ρ is function of ##\vec {r'}##.
 
Actually ##\vec{r}## is the position vector of target charge, and ##\vec{r}'## is the position vector of source charge, so we integrate it over ##\vec{r}'##, so I think I need the divergence with respect to ##\vec{r}'##
 
ehild said:
The electric field at a point P with position vector ##\vec r## is the integral of the contribution of all charge elements dq. Those contributions depend on the distance of the charge element from the point P. That distance is denoted by γ in your formula. ##\gamma =\vec r- \vec r' ##, ##\hat \gamma =\frac{\vec r- \vec r'}{|\vec r- \vec r'|}##.
You need the divergence with respect to ##\vec {r}##, while ρ is function of ##\vec {r'}##.
I get it now...! thank you very much!
 
You are welcome.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top