Trouble proving equivalence at limit

  • Thread starter Thread starter boris.rarden
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equivalence Limit
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equivalence of the electric field from a line segment of charge to that of a point charge at a significant distance. The user graphed both potential equations and observed similar behavior, prompting the need for an algebraic demonstration. They attempted to simplify the expressions under the assumption that the distance 'r' is much larger than the segment length 'a+b'. Suggestions included using series expansions and Taylor series for logarithmic approximations to facilitate the proof. Ultimately, the user reported success in demonstrating the equivalence by applying these mathematical techniques.
boris.rarden
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm trying to prove that Electric field away from a line segment of charge, is equivalent to the field away from a point charge, provided I observe from far enough.


Homework Equations



Ignoring all the constants:

potential_line = log( (sqrt(r^2 + a^2) + a) / (sqrt(r^2 + b^2) - b) )

potential_charge = 1/r

Here a+b is the length of the line segment, such that a and b are the parts of the line segment 'above' and 'below' the line of sight of the observer, assuming the line is vertical one. 'r' is the distance to the line along the line of sight.

Trying to show that the two equations become equivalent (close) when r is much bigger than a+b.

The Attempt at a Solution



I graphed with WorlframAlpha both formulas and the graphs look the same. Here are the two links. I took a=2, b=1 for an experiment.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=y=log((sqrt(x^2+4)+2)/(sqrt(x^2+1)-1))++from+1+to+100

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3/x+from+1+to+100

The graph looks very close, which is good. But how do I show this algebraically ? I tried to simplify that sqrt(r^2 + a^2) = sqrt(r^2 + b^2) = r, when r >> a+b. The graphs continue to look similar. I tried to simplify the numerator, and got this:

log( 1 + (a+b)/r + ab/r^2 )
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Looks like an interesting problem!

Normally, I try to rewrite functions in the form f(1+ε), where ε is a small quantity compared to 1. Then replace the expression f(1+ε) with a series expansion to 1st or 2nd order in ε.

So, for example, if we had an expression \sqrt{x^2 + 9}, where x is large compared to 9, we can rewrite this as

\begin{align}<br /> \sqrt{x^2 + 9} &amp; = \sqrt{x^2 (1 + 9/x^2)} \\<br /> &amp;= \sqrt{x^2} \cdot \sqrt{1 + 9/x^2} \\<br /> &amp;\approx x \cdot (1 + \frac{1}{2}\frac{9}{x^2}) \\<br /> &amp;= x + \frac{9}{2x}<br /> \end{align}

This works because the quantity 9/x2 is small when x is large. Note the use of the approximation \sqrt{1+\epsilon} =(1+\epsilon)^{1/2} \approx 1+\frac{1}{2} \epsilon.

See if you can apply that technique to your √-expressions and eventually to the logarithm as well.
 
Actually, is there an equivalent approximation trick for log ? I'm stuck because I have to consolidate 1/r and log( f(r) ). Should I use Taylor series ?
 
boris.rarden said:
Actually, is there an equivalent approximation trick for log ? I'm stuck because I have to consolidate 1/r and log( f(r) ). Should I use Taylor series ?
Yes, for the log use the Taylor series about the point x=1. I.e.,

log(1+ε) ≈ ?​
 
thanks, looks like i was able to show it after all following your ideas and the log expansion.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top