Why Use z Instead of r for Dipole Moment Calculation?

Idoubt
Messages
170
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



I'm trying to do problem 3.28 in griffith's electrodynamics. The problem statement is, to find the dipole moment of a spherical shell with charge distribution σ = kcosθ

The way I tried to do it was to use the definition of dipole moment, which griffith defines as

P= ∫r σ dζ

where r = position of charge w.r.t origin ( in this case R ) and dζ is volume element.

The above integral gives 0 ( unless i did something stupid)

I looked up the solution manual and the way it does it is to use Rcosθ ie z instead of r. Can some1 explain why this is?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should consider r in the integral as a vector. and since the charge distribution has symmetry with respect to x and y axes, we only consider z component of r which is Rcosθ. You can check x and y and make sure that they are zero.
 
I see now. My problem was that even though I looked at it as a vector, I didn't realize that the unit vector \hat{r} itself was a function of θ and \phi and I took it out of the integral. When i rewrite it in cartesian co-ordinates and do the integral for each component ( cartesian unit vectors are constant so I can take it out of the integral ) it comes out fine. But when I look at this, vector integration with spherical co-ordinates seems very complicated, is there an easier way than rewriting in cartesian co-ords and integrating?
 
i got confused with this problem too, thank you for taking it out. :smile:
 
:smile:
 
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