Why is there an inverse square law in electrostatics?

AI Thread Summary
The inverse square law in electrostatics arises from the masslessness of the photon, the force carrier of electromagnetism, as explained in quantum field theory. If photons had mass, the electrostatic potential would follow a different form known as the Yukawa potential, which is influenced by the mass of the photon. Current experiments suggest that the photon mass is extremely small, reinforcing the validity of the inverse square law. Classically, this law is derived from the way electric fields are modeled, where the density of field lines decreases with the square of the distance from the charge. Thus, the inverse square law is a fundamental aspect of electrostatics, closely tied to the nature of electric fields and the properties of photons.
sruthisupriya
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
I have a little doubt. why is there an inverse square law in electrostatics?why not some other than the inverse square? is there any relation/connection between the charges and the inverse square?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Good question! In quantum field theory, the inverse square law is shown to be a direct consequence of the masslessness of the carrier of the electromagnetic force, namely the photon. The field equations for a massive photon result in an expression for the electrostatic potential of the form:

\phi=C\frac{e^{-mr}}{r},

where m is the photon mass. This potential is called the Yukawa potential (in case you feel like Googling for more information).

Currently the experimental upper bound on the mass of the photon is 6\times10^{-17}eV (source: http://pdg.lbl.gov/2005/listings/s000.pdf) . So if the inverse square law doesn't hold exactly, it's pretty darn close.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A lot of things in physics have multiple explanations.

Classically, the inverse square law comes about because charges produce electric fields that can be modeled by little lines that begin only on + charges and end only on - charges. Since the area of the surface of a sphere is proportional to the square of the radius, you have to have the strength (the number of electric field lines per unit area) decrease as 1 over r squared.

Carl
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top