Why Does l Equal 1 in the Uniformly Magnetized Sphere Problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Old Guy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Jackson
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the uniformly magnetized sphere problem as outlined in Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics," specifically Section 5.10. The key equations involve the magnetic potential, denoted as Φ_M, which is derived using spherical harmonics and the Legendre polynomials P_l(cos θ). The conclusion reached is that the azimuthal symmetry of the problem allows for the simplification of the angular momentum quantum number l to equal 1, which is essential for solving the potential accurately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics" and Section 5.10
  • Familiarity with spherical harmonics and Legendre polynomials
  • Knowledge of magnetic potential and its mathematical formulation
  • Concept of azimuthal symmetry in physical systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the magnetic potential in uniformly magnetized spheres using spherical harmonics
  • Explore the properties of Legendre polynomials and their applications in physics
  • Investigate the implications of azimuthal symmetry on quantum numbers in physical problems
  • Review the orthogonality conditions of spherical harmonics and their significance in potential theory
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying electromagnetism, mathematical physics, or anyone involved in solving problems related to magnetic fields and potentials in spherical geometries.

Old Guy
Messages
101
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Jackson Section 5.10, the uniformly magnetized sphere, I'm trying to fill in the steps from his first equation to Equation 5.104. I get the same potential except I am lacking the cos[tex]\theta[/tex] term. My work shown below.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


[tex]$\begin{array}{l}<br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{{4\pi }}\int {\frac{{\cos \theta '}}{{\left| {\user1{x - x'}} \right|}}d\Omega '} \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{2}\int {\frac{1}{{\left| {\user1{x - x'}} \right|}}\cos \theta 'd\left( {\cos \theta '} \right)} \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{2}\int {\left[ {\sum\limits_{l = 0}^\infty {\frac{{r_ < ^l }}{{r_ > ^{l + 1} }}P_l \left( {\cos \theta } \right)} } \right]P_1 \left( {\cos \theta '} \right)d\left( {\cos \theta '} \right)} \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{2}\int {\frac{{r_ < ^{} }}{{r_ > ^2 }}P_1 \left( {\cos \theta } \right)P_1 \left( {\cos \theta '} \right)d\left( {\cos \theta '} \right)} \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{2}\frac{{r_ < ^{} }}{{r_ > ^2 }}\int {P_1 \left( {\cos \theta } \right)P_1 \left( {\cos \theta '} \right)d\left( {\cos \theta '} \right)} \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{2}\frac{{r_ < ^{} }}{{r_ > ^2 }}\left( {\frac{2}{{2 + 1}}} \right) \\ <br /> \Phi _M = \frac{{M_0 a^2 }}{3}\frac{{r_ < ^{} }}{{r_ > ^2 }} \\ <br /> \end{array}$[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I see two things wrong with your solution:

(1) You seem to be claiming that

[tex]\frac{1}{|\textbf{x}-\textbf{x}'|}=\sum\limits_{l = 0}^\infty {\frac{{r_ < ^l }}{{r_ > ^{l + 1} }}P_l \left( {\cos \theta } \right)}[/tex]

but this is only true if [itex]\theta[/itex]is defined to be the angle between [itex]\textbf{x}[/itex] and [itex]\textbf{x}'[/itex], not the polar angle of [itex]\textbf{x}[/itex]

(2) You also seem to claim that [itex]P_l(\cos\theta)[/itex] is orthogonal (under the weight function [itex]\sin\theta'[/itex] ) to [itex]P_{l'}(\cos\theta')[/itex], but this is only true if [itex]\theta=\theta'[/itex]
 
Thanks; I went through again but with the full spherical harmonics, and paid careful attention to the primed and unprimed values, and got it, but it raises a more general question I would appreciate some help on. I know that azimuthal symmetry allows me to automatically set m=0, and I understand why. I can also demonstrate that l must be 1 for this problem, but is there something (physically or mathmatically) that would allow me to know without further work that l can only =1?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K