What is the issue with this electrostatics problem?

4 replies · 2K views · last reply
NicolaiTheDane
Messages
100
Reaction score
10

Homework Statement


Circle centred on the origin of an xy axis plot, with two blue charges labelled q at upper-left and lower-left and a red charge labelled -3q at (a, 0) on the positive x-axis.


I'm suppose to set a general function of the electric field, at any point in the xy plane. As the picture shows, there are 2 point charges with 1 charge, and 1 point charge with -3 charge. Each of them are equally distanced from the origin, and all 3 are evenly spaced apart.

Homework Equations


I'm used Coulumbs law
Equation for the electric field E(r) as a sum over n point charges: 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) times the sum from i = 1 to n of q_i over r_i squared, times the unit vector r-hat.


The Attempt at a Solution


First I defined all the point charge locations, along with an arbitrary point, to represent the unknown point of the function.
Three vectors r1, r2 and r3 written as column vectors: r1 = (a, 0); r2 = (a cos(2π/3), a sin(2π/3)) = (-a/2, a√3/2); r3 = (a cos(2π/3), a sin(-2π/3)) = (-a/2, -a√3/2).

Equation P := [x; y] = [x; y], defining a point P as a column vector with coordinates x and y.


Then I merely use Coumlumbs law, to add up all the expressions:
Three Maple-rendered equations for point-charge field contributions q1, q2 and q3, each equal to 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) times a charge over the cube of the distance, times (P - r_i); q1 uses charge -3q.

Equation E = q1 + q2 + q3 written as plain text, with E the electric field and q1, q2, q3 the point charges.


The final expression isn't pretty at all though:
Maple output of a 2x1 column vector of electric field components E_x and E_y, each a sum of three Coulomb terms with 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) and denominators raised to the 3/2 power.


The field as displayed by maple (if one fixes the fieldstrength, otherwise some arrows become very very small) looks like this:
Vector field plot on axes from -1.5 to 1.5 showing arrows converging on a point near (1, 0) and at two points on the left, with arrows diverging near (-0.5, 1) and (-0.5, -1).


Which to me looks about right. However the vector function isn't divergence free, which suggests I have messed up something. What am I doing wrong?
 
Attachments
  • Circle centred on the origin of an xy axis plot, with two blue charges labelled q at upper-left and lower-left and a red charge labelled -3q at (a, 0) on the positive x-axis.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-9-35.png
    3.6 KB · Views: 773
  • Equation for the electric field E(r) as a sum over n point charges: 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) times the sum from i = 1 to n of q_i over r_i squared, times the unit vector r-hat.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-11-28.png
    1,001 bytes · Views: 390
  • Three vectors r1, r2 and r3 written as column vectors: r1 = (a, 0); r2 = (a cos(2π/3), a sin(2π/3)) = (-a/2, a√3/2); r3 = (a cos(2π/3), a sin(-2π/3)) = (-a/2, -a√3/2).
    upload_2018-9-9_19-12-29.png
    2.4 KB · Views: 426
  • Equation P := [x; y] = [x; y], defining a point P as a column vector with coordinates x and y.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-12-34.png
    513 bytes · Views: 425
  • Three Maple-rendered equations for point-charge field contributions q1, q2 and q3, each equal to 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) times a charge over the cube of the distance, times (P - r_i); q1 uses charge -3q.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-13-8.png
    2.5 KB · Views: 423
  • Equation E = q1 + q2 + q3 written as plain text, with E the electric field and q1, q2, q3 the point charges.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-13-33.png
    546 bytes · Views: 421
  • Maple output of a 2x1 column vector of electric field components E_x and E_y, each a sum of three Coulomb terms with 1/(4 pi epsilon_0) and denominators raised to the 3/2 power.
    upload_2018-9-9_19-14-16.png
    5.3 KB · Views: 428
  • Vector field plot on axes from -1.5 to 1.5 showing arrows converging on a point near (1, 0) and at two points on the left, with arrows diverging near (-0.5, 1) and (-0.5, -1).
    upload_2018-9-9_19-17-5.png
    23.4 KB · Views: 448
The two dimensional function will not be divergence free, but if you included the z-component of the electric field, it would then be divergence free except at the locations of the electrical charges. ## \\ ## I didn't carefully check your equations, but they seem to be correct.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: NicolaiTheDane
Charles Link said:
The two dimensional function will not be divergence free, but if you included the z-component of the electric field, it would then be divergence free except at the locations of the electrical charges. ## \\ ## I didn't carefully check your equations, but they seem to be correct.

Ahh alright then. Thanks a bunch! :)
 
NicolaiTheDane said:
Ahh alright then. Thanks a bunch! :)
What is also the case is that when you draw lines of flux for a 3-D case in two dimensions, the result is inherent inaccuracies where the density of lines doesn't fall off as inverse square, etc. The line density will be ## \frac{1}{r} ## in a 2-D diagram of a 3 dimensional case if they are drawn as continuous lines.
 
Last edited:
And an addition to post 2: You can see this with a single point charge: If you let ## E=\frac{Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_o}(\frac{x}{(x^2+y^2)^{3/2}} \hat{i} +\frac{y}{(x^2+y^2)^{3/2}} \hat{j}) ##, the divergence is non-zero everywhere, but if you write it as ## E=\frac{Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_o}(\frac{x}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}} \hat{i}+\frac{y}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}} \hat{j}+\frac{z}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}} \hat{k} ) ## and compute ## \nabla \cdot E ##, you will find it is indeed zero everywhere except at ## (0,0,0) ##.