Verify Laplace equation in rectangular coordinates.

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around verifying the Laplace equation in rectangular coordinates for a vector field, specifically addressing the expression ∇²E = 0. It is clarified that while each component of the vector E must satisfy Laplace's equation, the equation as initially presented was incorrect. The participants agree that the Laplacian can be split into parts, allowing for separate treatment of the x, y, and z components. The distinction between the vector Laplacian and the scalar potential Laplacian is emphasized, with a focus on the correct interpretation of the equations. Overall, the conversation highlights the nuances of applying the Laplace equation to vector fields.
yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
295
Just want to verify Laplace equation in rectangular coordinates that:

\nabla ^2 \vec E = 0

\Rightarrow\; \nabla^2 \vec E = \left ( \frac {\partial^2}{\partial x^2} +\frac {\partial^2}{\partial y^2} +\frac {\partial^2}{\partial z^2} \right ) ( \hat x E_x +\hat y E_y + \hat z E_z) = 0

\hbox {(1)}\;\Rightarrow \;\frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial x^2} = 0,\;\frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial y^2} = 0 \;\hbox { and } \frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial z^2} = 0

And

\hbox {(2)}\; \nabla ^2 \vec E = \nabla^2_{xy}\vec E + \frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial z^2} = 0 \;\hbox { where }\; \nabla^2_{xy}\vec E = \left ( \frac {\partial^2}{\partial x^2} +\frac {\partial^2}{\partial y^2} \right ) ( \hat x E_x +\hat y E_y + \hat z E_z)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
(1) is not right (which implies (2) is not what you're looking for). Are you sure you don't mean

\nabla^2 \phi = 0

as this is the typical potential you work with in classical physics.

If you mean what you wrote, what that tells you is that each component of this vector satisfies Laplace's equation; that is,

{{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial x^2}} + {{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial y^2}} + {{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial z^2}} = 0

and so on for each component
 
Pengwuino said:
(1) is not right (which implies (2) is not what you're looking for). Are you sure you don't mean

\nabla^2 \phi = 0

as this is the typical potential you work with in classical physics.

If you mean what you wrote, what that tells you is that each component of this vector satisfies Laplace's equation; that is,

{{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial x^2}} + {{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial y^2}} + {{\partial^2 E_x}\over{\partial z^2}} = 0

and so on for each component

Thanks for the reply. I don't mean \nabla^2 \phi. I was referring to Laplacian of a vector where:

\nabla^2 \vec E = \left ( \frac {\partial^2}{\partial x^2} +\frac {\partial^2}{\partial y^2} +\frac {\partial^2}{\partial z^2} \right ) ( \hat x E_x +\hat y E_y + \hat z E_z) = 0

So You say \nabla^2 \vec E = 0 \;\hbox { don't mean }\;\;\frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial x^2} = 0,\;\frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial y^2} = 0 \;\hbox { and } \frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial z^2} = 0

The second question is totally independent to the first question, even I got the first one wrong, that has no bearing on the second question.

What I meant in the second question is I can split the \nabla^2_{xyz} \;\hbox { into Laplacian in x and y plus Laplacian in z } \; \Rightarrow\;\nabla ^2_{xyz} \vec E = \nabla^2_{xy}\vec E + \frac {\partial^2 \vec E}{\partial z^2}

Thanks

Alan
 
I see, so yah, you can split the Laplacian into parts like that. However, again, what i said in the first part still matters. You'll be doing the Laplacian on each individual component, but it can be split up like that.
 
Thanks
 
Thread 'What is the pressure of trapped air inside this tube?'
As you can see from the picture, i have an uneven U-shaped tube, sealed at the short end. I fill the tube with water and i seal it. So the short side is filled with water and the long side ends up containg water and trapped air. Now the tube is sealed on both sides and i turn it in such a way that the traped air moves at the short side. Are my claims about pressure in senarios A & B correct? What is the pressure for all points in senario C? (My question is basically coming from watching...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
643
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
751
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
604
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
537
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K