Vector potential due to oscillating dipole

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the magnetic vector potential A at a point p due to an oscillating dipole of length s, under the assumption that the distance r from the dipole is much greater than s. The problem is situated within the context of electromagnetism, specifically dealing with vector potentials and oscillating currents.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the integral calculation for the vector potential, with some expressing confusion over the inclusion of an exponential term. There are discussions about potential approximations and variable changes that could simplify the integral. Others question the notation used for constants and the time dependence of the current in the dipole.

Discussion Status

The conversation has evolved with participants providing clarifications and suggestions for approximations. Some have pointed out the need to consider the relationship between the dipole length and the wavelength of radiation. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of these approximations on the integral calculation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the constraints of the problem, including the assumptions that s is much smaller than r and that the dipole is oscillating. There is also mention of the need to keep track of terms in expansions that may not be negligible under certain conditions.

_Andreas
Messages
141
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Calculate the magnetic vector potential A at a point p located at a distance r from the axis of an oscillating dipole of length s.

It is assumed that [tex]r\gg s[/tex] and that the current is the same throughout s.

Homework Equations



[tex]r=\sqrt{(x^2+(z-z')^2)},[/tex] where x,z is the horizontal and vertical coordinates of p, respectively, and z' is the vertical coordinate of the source point. The axis of the dipole lies on the z axis, and so x'=0. The problem is confined to the xz plane only.

[tex]A=c\int^{s/2}_{-s/2}\frac{\exp(ikr)}{r}dz' \hat{z},[/tex]

where c is a constant and [tex]k[/tex] is the wave number. The exponential comes from the fact that the current is a function of the retarded time, [tex][t]=t-r/c[/tex].

The Attempt at a Solution



I really don't know how to calculate this integral. Without the exponential I would've been fine, but now... lol wut? Are there perhaps some approximations, expansions, or variable changes that I could do? Any tips?

If it is of any help, the answer is apparently the same answer as in the case of a current localized at the center of the dipole:

[tex]A=d*\frac{\exp(i\omega[t])}{r}s \hat{z}[/tex]

(d is a constant.)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
_Andreas said:
[tex]r=\sqrt{(x^2+(z-z')^2)},[/tex] where x,z is the horizontal and vertical coordinates of p, respectively, and z' is the vertical coordinate of the source point.

The problem statement you provided defines [itex]r[/itex] as the distance from the center of the dipole ([itex]z'=0[/itex] I presume) to the point [itex]p[/itex]...you'll want to use a different letter, like say, (capital) [itex]R[/itex] to represent the separation of the source point and field point:

[tex]r=\sqrt{x^2+z^2}[/tex]

[tex]R=\sqrt{(x^2+(z-z')^2)}[/tex]

[tex]A=c\int^{s/2}_{-s/2}\frac{\exp(ikr)}{r}dz' \hat{z},[/tex]

where c is a constant and [tex]k[/tex] is the wave number. The exponential comes from the fact that the current is a function of the retarded time, [tex][t]=t-r/c[/tex].[/tex]

It seems like you are using [itex]c[/itex] to represent both a constant with units of Tesla-meters (in SI) and the speed of light...that's pretty confusing notation to me.

Also, the current in an oscillating dipole varies with time, so why is there no [itex]t[/itex] in this expression?

In SI units, the expression for the vector potential is something like

[tex]\textbf{A}(\textbf{r},t)=\frac{\mu_0}{4\pi}\int \frac{I(t-\frac{R}{c})}{R}dz'\mathbf{\hat{z}}[/tex]
 
Wow, that's a lot of annoying mistakes I did.

gabbagabbahey said:
The problem statement you provided defines [itex]r[/itex] as the distance from the center of the dipole ([itex]z'=0[/itex] I presume) to the point [itex]p[/itex]...you'll want to use a different letter, like say, (capital) [itex]R[/itex] to represent the separation of the source point and field point:

[tex]r=\sqrt{x^2+z^2}[/tex]

[tex]R=\sqrt{(x^2+(z-z')^2)}[/tex]

Yes, my bad.

gabbagabbahey said:
It seems like you are using [itex]c[/itex] to represent both a constant with units of Tesla-meters (in SI) and the speed of light...that's pretty confusing notation to me.

Oh boy. Yes, that is definitely confusing. The factor c in front of the integral is not supposed to be the speed of light.

gabbagabbahey said:
Also, the current in an oscillating dipole varies with time, so why is there no [itex]t[/itex] in this expression?

I shouldn't have called c a constant, since there's supposed to be a time-dependent exponential included.

gabbagabbahey said:
In SI units, the expression for the vector potential is something like

[tex]\textbf{A}(\textbf{r},t)=\frac{\mu_0}{4\pi}\int \frac{I(t-\frac{R}{c})}{R}dz'\mathbf{\hat{z}}[/tex]

Yes. In my case it's (yes, I even forgot the minus sign in the exponential)

[tex]\frac{\mu_0I_0\exp(i\omega t)}{4\pi}\int_{-s/2}^{s/2}\frac{\exp(-ikR)}{R}dz'\hat{z},[/tex]

where R is as you said, and [tex]I_0[/tex] is the amplitude of the current, which is independent of z'.

I still don't know how to calculate the integral, though.
 
_Andreas said:
Yes. In my case it's (yes, I even forgot the minus sign in the exponential)

[tex]\frac{\mu_0I_0\exp(i\omega t)}{4\pi}\int_{-s/2}^{s/2}\frac{\exp(-ikR)}{R}dz'\hat{z},[/tex]

where R is as you said, and [tex]I_0[/tex] is the amplitude of the current, which is independent of z'.

I still don't know how to calculate the integral, though.

You'll probably want to use [itex]\omega/c[/itex] instead of [itex]k[/itex] here; as you'll want to use the approximation that [itex]s\ll \frac{\omega}{c}[/itex] at some point (basically that the dipole is very small compared to the wavelength of the radiation it produces)

You also are given that [itex]s\ll r[/itex], and since [itex]|z'|\leq s[/itex], you know [itex]z'\ll r[/itex]...in order for this knowledge to be useful, you'll want to use the law of cosines to express [itex]R[/itex] in terms of [itex]z'[/itex], [itex]r[/itex] and the angle between the source and field point vectors (As measured from the center of the dipole). You can then Taylor expand both [itex]1/R[/itex] and [itex]\text{exp}(-i\omega R/c)[/itex] for small [itex]z'/r[/itex].
 
Thank you very much!

Doing as you say I get

[tex]R=\sqrt{z'^2+r^2-2z'r\cos(\theta)}=r\sqrt{(z'/r)^2+1-2z'/r\cos(\theta)}.[/tex]

Expanding [tex]1/R[/tex] and [tex]e^{-ikR}[/tex] around [tex]z'/r=0[/tex] yields [tex]1/r[/tex] and [tex]e^{-ikr}[/tex], respectively (the first order terms of both expansions contain factors [tex]z'/r^2[/tex] and therefore become insignificant).

The integral then simply becomes

[tex]\frac{\mu_0I_0e^{i\omega(t-kr)}}{4\pi r}\int dz' \hat{z},[/tex]

since [tex]r[/tex] is independent of [tex]z'[/tex]. This gives me the correct answer.
 
Last edited:
_Andreas said:
Expanding [tex]1/R[/tex] and [tex]e^{-ikR}[/tex] around [tex]z'/r=0[/tex] yields [tex]1/r[/tex] and [tex]e^{-ikr}[/tex], respectively (the first order terms of both expansions contain factors [tex]z'/r^2[/tex] and therefore become insignificant).

Careful, you can definitely say terms with [itex]\left(\frac{z'}{r}\right)^2[/tex] are insignificant (the square of a very small number is an even smaller number), but that doesn't necessarily mean that [itex]\frac{z'}{r^2}[/itex] is negligible...As an example, if [itex]s=10^{-6}[/itex] and [itex]r=10^{-4}[/itex], then [itex]|z'|\leq s\ll r[/itex] as demanded by the problem statement, but [itex]\frac{z'}{r^2}\leq\frac{s}{r^2}=100[/itex] won't be negligible.<br /> <br /> You will need to keep the first order terms in your expansions, and use your second approximation ([itex]s\ll \frac{\omega}{c}[/tex] )to later rid yourself of them.[/itex][/itex]
 
I'm not exactly having my finest moment as an aspiring physicist here. I blame it on simply rushing through the calculations since I'd really like to be doing something else for a little while. :cry:

gabbagabbahey said:
Careful, you can definitely say terms with [itex]\left(\frac{z'}{r}\right)^2[/tex] are insignificant (the square of a very small number is an even smaller number), but that doesn't necessarily mean that [itex]\frac{z'}{r^2}[/itex] is negligible...As an example, if [itex]s=10^{-6}[/itex] and [itex]r=10^{-4}[/itex], then [itex]|z'|\leq s\ll r[/itex] as demanded by the problem statement, but [itex]\frac{z'}{r^2}\leq\frac{s}{r^2}=100[/itex] won't be negligible.<br /> <br /> You will need to keep the first order terms in your expansions, and use your second approximation ([itex]s\ll \frac{\omega}{c}[/tex] )to later rid yourself of them.[/itex][/itex]
[itex][itex] <br /> You're right. I didn't get any [itex]\frac{z'}{r^2}[/itex] terms, though; the expansions I did were incorrect. I did have to use the approximation [itex]s\ll \frac{\omega}{c}[/tex] in one of the expansions, though.<br /> <br /> Thanks again![/itex][/itex][/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K