Undergrad Why do we ignore the contribution to a surface integral from the point r=0?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the treatment of singularities in the context of dipole distributions, specifically addressing the contribution to surface integrals at the point r=0. The potential and field of a dipole distribution are analyzed using spherical coordinates, revealing that while the integrand is discontinuous at r=0, it can still be integrated without complications. The participants conclude that the electric field of a dipole distribution is well-defined despite the singularity, and that the surface integral does not require removal of the singularity for convergence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of dipole distributions in electromagnetism
  • Familiarity with spherical and polar coordinates
  • Knowledge of surface integrals and their properties
  • Concept of singularities in mathematical physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of singularities in electromagnetic fields
  • Learn about the Dirac delta function and its applications in physics
  • Explore the mathematical treatment of surface integrals in electromagnetism
  • Investigate the relationship between electric fields and potential functions in dipole distributions
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism, particularly those interested in the behavior of fields around dipole distributions and the mathematical handling of singularities.

  • #31
Charles Link said:
I am a little puzzled by the diagram of post 1. The region where ## \vec{M} ## is non-zero is presumably the region below the paraboloid, and you want to find the contribution to the integral at a point ## \vec{r} ## that lies on the paraboloid. The integral over ## R ## is ok, but the ## \vec{r} ## in the diagram needs to be ## \vec{r}' ##, and the ## r ## in the denominator is ## r=|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'| ##. This ## r ## is really a poor choice of letters, and perhaps should be called letter ## s ## . It's very clumsy to work with these complicated surface integral formulas and prove anything meaningful. It's much easier to simplify what's going on, and to prove things for the simplified case.
I get it
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
@Mike400 See also post 27. I don't think you saw it yet.
 
  • #33
Charles Link said:
You might consider the general case to be composed of super-positions of a couple of basic building blocks. Perhaps that would complete the proof.
Even near the surface of a small disc of surface charge density ## \sigma ##, we find ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ##. The electric field does not experience a singularity here.

I know that electric field of an infinite sheet of charge in ##x##-##y## plane is ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{k})##. From this fact, how can we conclude that electric field very close to the surface point of a ##\sigma## distribution is approximately ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{n}) ## where ##\hat{n}## is normal to surface point.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
  • #34
I've no clue, what the volume and surface is you want to integrate over in #1. You have to specify your problem first before one can help to solve the integrals. Also I don't understand your notation. I can only guess you mean the solution for a continuous magnetic-dipole distribution. One correct form of the formula reads
$$\phi(\vec{x})=-\vec{\nabla}_x \cdot \int_{V} \mathrm{d}^3 x' \frac{\vec{M}(\vec{x}')}{4 \pi |\vec{x}-\vec{x}'|}.$$
The surface term can usually be neglected (except if there are singularities in ##\vec{M}## on the surface).

If ##\vec{x} \notin V##, there's no singularity to think about. If ##\vec{x} \in V## and ##\vec{M}## has no singularities anywhere, there's also no singularity. To see this take a little sphere around ##\vec{x}## and introduce spherical coordinates,
$$\vec{x}'=\vec{x}+r' \begin{pmatrix} \cos \varphi' \sin \vartheta' \\ \sin \varphi' \sin \vartheta ' \\ \cos \vartheta' \end{pmatrix}.$$
Then ##\mathrm{d}^3 x' = \mathrm{d} r' \mathrm{d} \vartheta' \mathrm{\varphi'} r^{\prime 2} \sin \vartheta'##, and the singularity due to the Green's-function factor in the integrand ##1/|\vec{x}-\vec{x}'|=1/r'## is safely compensated by the volume element, i.e., under these conditions the singularity is integrable.

As a simple example it's a nice exercise to calculate the magnetic field of a homogeneously magnetized sphere.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Likes Mike400
  • #35
Mike400 said:
I know that electric field of an infinite sheet of charge in ##x##-##y## plane is ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{k})##. From this fact, how can we conclude that electric field very close to the surface point of a ##\sigma## distribution is approximately ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{n}) ## where ##\hat{n}## is normal to surface point.
Of course, there is a singularity. The jump of the normal component of ##\vec{D}=\epsilon_0 \vec{E}## is the surface charge density ##\sigma##. You have to be careful with the directions of the normal vector. It originates from the integration over a little volume with two sides (you can simply use a "pill box") parallel to the surface and using Gauss's integral theorem. The normal vectors are always pointing outside the integration volume, i.e., the normal has to be taken in opposite directions on the both sides of the surface.

It's also intuitive: Due to the surface charge, the electric field always points away (towards) the surface if ##\sigma>0## (##\sigma<0##), i.e., into opposite directions on both sides of the surface.
 
  • #36
Mike400 said:
I know that electric field of an infinite sheet of charge in ##x##-##y## plane is ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{k})##. From this fact, how can we conclude that electric field very close to the surface point of a ##\sigma## distribution is approximately ## \vec{E}=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{n}) ## where ##\hat{n}## is normal to surface point.
I think I have got the answer. Please check its validity.

Consider a ##\sigma## distribution and a point ##P## infinitely close to it. Then:

##\displaystyle\mathbf{H}(P)_1=\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r^2}(\hat{\mathbf{r}})\ dS'##

Now increase the linear dimensions of the system infinitely. Then:

##\displaystyle\mathbf{H}(P)_{\infty}=\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{(nr)^2} \left( \dfrac{n\mathbf{r}}{nr} \right) n^2 dS'
=\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r^2}(\hat{\mathbf{r}})\ dS'=\mathbf{H}(P)_1##

Now after the increment, ##\sigma## distribution is an infinite sheet near point ##P##. Point ##P## is also at a finite distance from ##\sigma## distribution (infinite sheet). Therefore:

##\mathbf{H}(P)_1=\mathbf{H}(P)_{\infty}=\dfrac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_0} (\hat{\mathbf{n}})##
 
  • #37
Mike400 said:
I think I have got the answer. Please check its validity.

Consider a σσ distribution and a point PP infinitely close to it. Then:

H(P)1=∫S′σr2(^r) dS′H(P)1=∫S′σr2(r^) dS′

Now increase the linear dimensions of the system infinitely. Then:

##\displaystyle\mathbf{H}(P)_{\infty}=\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{(nr)^2} \left( \dfrac{n\mathbf{r}}{nr} \right) n^2 dS'
=\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r^2}(\hat{\mathbf{r}})\ dS'=\mathbf{H}(P)_1##

Now after the increment, σσ distribution is an infinite sheet near point PP. Point PP is also at a finite distance from σσ distribution (infinite sheet). Therefore:

H(P)1=H(P)∞=σ2ϵ0(^n)H(P)1=H(P)∞=σ2ϵ0(n^)
The equation actually reads ## \vec{H}(\vec{r})=\int \frac{\sigma_m (\vec{r}')}{4 \pi \mu_o r^3} (\vec{r}-\vec{r}') dS' ## where ## r=|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'| ##.
I'm defining ## \vec{M} ## so that ## \vec{B}=\mu_o \vec{H}+\vec{M} ##. ## \\ ## ## \vec{H}=\frac{\sigma_m}{2 \mu_o} ##.
 
Last edited:
  • #38
Now is there a similar way to show that ##\displaystyle\psi=\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r} dS'## does not blow up near the surface?
 
  • #39
The easiest way I know of is that ## \psi=\pm \int H \cdot dr ##. At ##r=0 ##, the ## H ## field remains finite. Like ## E ## it is conservative, (when there are no currents in conductors) and ## \nabla \times H=0 ##. Thereby, the equation ## \psi=\int H \cdot dr ## can be used.
 
  • Like
Likes Mike400
  • #40
Charles Link said:
The easiest way I know of is that ## \psi=\pm \int H \cdot dr ##. At ##r=0 ##, the ## H ## field remains finite. Like ## E ## it is conservative, (when there are no currents in conductors) and ## \nabla \times H=0 ##. Thereby, the equation ## \psi=\int H \cdot dr ## can be used.
That is what I thought too.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
  • #41
Is there a way to show:

##(1)\displaystyle\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r} dS'## is continuous all over space

##(2)\displaystyle\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r^2}\ \hat{\mathbf{r}}\ dS'## is continuous everywhere except at ##S'##
 
  • #42
Mike400 said:
Is there a way to show:

##(1)\displaystyle\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r} dS'## is continuous all over space

##(2)\displaystyle\int_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{r^2}\ \hat{\mathbf{r}}\ dS'## is continuous everywhere except at ##S'##
By Gauss' law, ##E_{1 \, ||}-E_{2 \, ||}=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ##. and similarly for ## H ##. (parallel to ## \hat{n} ##). Meanwhile, the perpendicular ## E_1 ## and ## E_2 ## are equal. (parallel to the surface).
 
  • #43
Charles Link said:
By Gauss' law, ##E_{1 \, ||}-E_{2 \, ||}=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ##. and similarly for ## H ##. (parallel to ## \hat{n} ##). Meanwhile, the perpendicular ## E_1 ## and ## E_2 ## are equal. (parallel to the surface).
How shall we show field is continuous at other points?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K