Why Don't First-Order Terms Disappear in the Taylor Expansion for Scalar Fields?

ibyea
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Page 35 of Jackson's Electrodynamics (3rd ed), it gives the following equation (basically trying to prove your standard 1/r potential is a solution to Poisson equation):

\nabla^2 \Phi_a = \frac{ -1 }{ \epsilon_0 } \int \frac{ a^2 }{( r^2 + a^2)^{5/2} } \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) d^3 x'

Where r is distance from center of a sphere with radius R, centered at \boldsymbol{x} and a is a parameter much smaller than R whose limit approaches to 0. And note that r = \sqrt{ (x' - x)^2 + (y' - y)^2 + (z' - z)^2}. R is chosen such that \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) changes little inside the sphere. The integral is zero outside the sphere as a approaches zero, so only the inside of the sphere is considered.

Then the book says, "with a Taylor series expansion of the well behaved \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) around \boldsymbol{x'} = \boldsymbol{x}, one finds":

\nabla^2 \Phi_a = \frac{ -1 }{ \epsilon_0 } \int_0^R \frac{ a^2 }{( r^2 + a^2)^{5/2} } [ \rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \nabla^2 \rho + \ldots ] r^2 dr + O( a^2 )

Essentially I tried to fill in the gaps between those two steps.

Homework Equations


Taylor expansion for scalar field:

f(\boldsymbol{x'}) = f(\boldsymbol{x}) + \boldsymbol{x} \cdot \nabla f + \frac{ 1 }{ 2 } (\boldsymbol{x} \cdot \nabla)^2 f

The Attempt at a Solution


Well, essentially I attempted to solve the problem by using the relevant equations. First of all, I changed d^3 x' into spherical polar and the angular parts integrate into 4 \pi.

This is where I get lost because when I did the Taylor expansion, the first order terms did not go away. Secondly the second order term is a problem because I never managed to get a six at the bottom. In fact, what I get is:

\rho + r \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial r } + \frac{1}{2} r^2 \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial r } + \frac{1}{2} r^2 \frac{ \partial^2 \rho }{ \partial r^2 }

Which is not the same as
\rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \nabla^2 \rho = \rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \frac{\partial^2 \rho}{\partial r^2}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I really don't understand that expansion, either, but it seems pretty much irrelevant, because when you write:

\rho(x') = \rho(x) + ...

the only term that survives, in the limit as a \rightarrow 0, is the first term.

What's important is that

lim_{a \rightarrow 0} \int_0^R \frac{-3a^2}{(r^2 + a^2)^{\frac{5}{2}}} r^2 dr = -1

Jackson claims that this can be done by "direct integration", but I don't see that, at all. I would first let r = a u, to get:
lim_{a \rightarrow 0} \int_0^\frac{R}{a} \frac{-3}{(u^2 + 1)^{\frac{5}{2}}} u^2 du
= \int_0^\infty \frac{-3}{(u^2 + 1)^{\frac{5}{2}}} u^2 du

Then I would use a trig substitution: u = tan(\theta).
 
Thanks! Good to know I wasn't just being too dumb to see the obvious.
 
ibyea said:

Homework Statement


Page 35 of Jackson's Electrodynamics (3rd ed), it gives the following equation (basically trying to prove your standard 1/r potential is a solution to Poisson equation):

\nabla^2 \Phi_a = \frac{ -1 }{ \epsilon_0 } \int \frac{ a^2 }{( r^2 + a^2)^{5/2} } \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) d^3 x'

Where r is distance from center of a sphere with radius R, centered at \boldsymbol{x} and a is a parameter much smaller than R whose limit approaches to 0. And note that r = \sqrt{ (x' - x)^2 + (y' - y)^2 + (z' - z)^2}. R is chosen such that \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) changes little inside the sphere. The integral is zero outside the sphere as a approaches zero, so only the inside of the sphere is considered.

Then the book says, "with a Taylor series expansion of the well behaved \rho( \boldsymbol{x'} ) around \boldsymbol{x'} = \boldsymbol{x}, one finds":

\nabla^2 \Phi_a = \frac{ -1 }{ \epsilon_0 } \int_0^R \frac{ a^2 }{( r^2 + a^2)^{5/2} } [ \rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \nabla^2 \rho + \ldots ] r^2 dr + O( a^2 )

Essentially I tried to fill in the gaps between those two steps.

Homework Equations


Taylor expansion for scalar field:

f(\boldsymbol{x'}) = f(\boldsymbol{x}) + \boldsymbol{x} \cdot \nabla f + \frac{ 1 }{ 2 } (\boldsymbol{x} \cdot \nabla)^2 f

The Attempt at a Solution


Well, essentially I attempted to solve the problem by using the relevant equations. First of all, I changed d^3 x' into spherical polar and the angular parts integrate into 4 \pi.

This is where I get lost because when I did the Taylor expansion, the first order terms did not go away. Secondly the second order term is a problem because I never managed to get a six at the bottom. In fact, what I get is:

\rho + r \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial r } + \frac{1}{2} r^2 \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial r } + \frac{1}{2} r^2 \frac{ \partial^2 \rho }{ \partial r^2 }

Which is not the same as
\rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \nabla^2 \rho = \rho( \boldsymbol{x} ) + \frac{ r^2 }{ 6 } \frac{\partial^2 \rho}{\partial r^2}
If we align the z axis with the vector ##\nabla f##, then the ## \boldsymbol{x} \cdot \nabla f## term introduces an extra factor ##\cos \theta##. Integrating

\int_0^\pi d\theta \sin \theta \cos \theta
gives zero which kills that term.

The next term introduces a factor ##(\cos \theta )^2##. The integral is
\int_0^\pi d\theta \sin \theta \cos^2 \theta = \frac{2}{3} which is 1/3 of the result with no factor of ##\cos \theta##. Taking into account the factor of 1/2 from the Taylor expansion, we get the factor of 1/6 of Jackson.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top