Gauss's Law (Differential Form)

In summary, the problem involves finding the electric field and electrostatic potential inside and outside a sphere of radius R using the differential form of Gauss's Law and Poisson's equation. The charge density inside the sphere varies as ##\rho (r) = \alpha r^2 \ (r<R)## and is zero elsewhere. The electric field inside the sphere is found to be ##\vec{E} = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0}## and the potential is ##\phi= -\frac{\alpha}{\epsilon_0} (\frac{r^4}{12} + Cr + B)##. For the case where ##r>R##, the charge enclosed is found to
  • #1
roam
1,271
12

Homework Statement



Find the electric field inside and outside a sphere of radius R using the differential form of Gauss's law. Then find the electrostatic potential using Poisson's equation.

Charge density of the sphere varies as ##\rho (r) = \alpha r^2 \ (r<R)## and ##\rho(r)=0 \ elsewhere##.

Homework Equations



##\nabla . E = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}##

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}## (Poisson)

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm confused since using the differential form seems redundant, because you must first find the electric field using the integral form (unless I'm mistaken). Here's my attempt:

For inside the sphere (##r<R##) the charge enclosed is:

##Q=\rho V = \alpha r^2 . \frac{4}{3} \pi r^3 = \frac{4\alpha r^5 \pi}{3}##​

Divergence of the field in spherical coordinates is:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r) + \frac{1}{r sin \theta} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} (sin \theta E_\theta) + \frac{1}{r sin \phi} \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi} ##

Since no change in ##\theta## and ##\phi## we can just take the first term:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r)##

Now finding ##E_r##

##|E_r| \oint da = |E_r| 4 \pi r^2 = \frac{4 \alpha r^5 \pi}{3 \epsilon_0} ##

##E_r = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0}##

So substituting back:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0})##

##=\frac{\alpha}{3 \epsilon_0} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} r^3 = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}= \frac{\rho(r)}{\epsilon_0}##

Now integrating we get:

##\int(\nabla. E) dr=\int \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0} + C##

So it's the same answer as using the integral form of Gauss's law. So what is the point of using the differential form?

Now using Poisson's equation:

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = - \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}##

I think I must take a double integral:

##\int \int - \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr dr##

##\frac{-\alpha}{\epsilon_0} \int (\frac{r^3}{3} + C) dr##

##\phi = \frac{-\alpha}{\epsilon_0} (\frac{r^4}{12}+Cr+B)##

Is this right? And what I should I do about the constants? :confused:

And when we are outside the sphere (r>R), with ##\rho=0## we will have ##Q=(0)V=0##. Therefore both the electric field and ##\phi## will be zero?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • density.jpg
    density.jpg
    9.3 KB · Views: 700
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
roam said:

Homework Statement



Find the electric field inside and outside a sphere of radius R using the differential form of Gauss's law. Then find the electrostatic potential using Poisson's equation.

Charge density of the sphere varies as ##\rho (r) = \alpha r^2 \ (r<R)## and ##\rho(r)=0 \ elsewhere##.

Homework Equations



##\nabla . E = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}##

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}## (Poisson)

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm confused since using the differential form seems redundant, because you must first find the electric field using the integral form (unless I'm mistaken). Here's my attempt:

For inside the sphere (##r<R##) the charge enclosed is:

##Q=\rho V = \alpha r^2 . \frac{4}{3} \pi r^3 = \frac{4\alpha r^5 \pi}{3}##​
This isn't correct. ##Q=\rho V## only works if you have a constant charge density. Because the density varies in this problem, you have to integrate to find the charge enclosed. But you don't need that here.

Divergence of the field in spherical coordinates is:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r) + \frac{1}{r sin \theta} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} (sin \theta E_\theta) + \frac{1}{r sin \phi} \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi} ##

Since no change in ##\theta## and ##\phi## we can just take the first term:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r)##
The differential form of Gauss's Law is ##\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \rho##. You have expressions for both sides. Just substitute them into get a differential equation you have to solve. You're going to integrate, but you're not using the integral form of Gauss's law.


Now finding ##E_r##

##|E_r| \oint da = |E_r| 4 \pi r^2 = \frac{4 \alpha r^5 \pi}{3 \epsilon_0} ##

##E_r = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0}##

So substituting back:

##\nabla . \vec{E} = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0})##

##=\frac{\alpha}{3 \epsilon_0} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} r^3 = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}= \frac{\rho(r)}{\epsilon_0}##

Now integrating we get:

##\int(\nabla. E) dr=\int \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0} + C##

So it's the same answer as using the integral form of Gauss's law. So what is the point of using the differential form?

Now using Poisson's equation:

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = - \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}##

I think I must take a double integral:

##\int \int - \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr dr##

##\frac{-\alpha}{\epsilon_0} \int (\frac{r^3}{3} + C) dr##

##\phi = \frac{-\alpha}{\epsilon_0} (\frac{r^4}{12}+Cr+B)##

Is this right? And what I should I do about the constants? :confused:

And when we are outside the sphere (r>R), with ##\rho=0## we will have ##Q=(0)V=0##. Therefore both the electric field and ##\phi## will be zero?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
  • #3
vela said:
The differential form of Gauss's Law is ##\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \rho##. You have expressions for both sides. Just substitute them into get a differential equation you have to solve. You're going to integrate, but you're not using the integral form of Gauss's law.

Thank you for the reply. But should it not be ##\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \rho / \epsilon_0## (divided by the permittivity of free space)? This is what I did:

##\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}##

##\int \nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \int \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} \implies \vec{E} = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3\epsilon_0}##​

Is this right? For the potential I used Poisson's equation:

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} \implies \phi= \int \int \frac{- \alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr dr = -\frac{\alpha}{\epsilon_0} (\frac{r^4}{12} + Cr + B)##

I tried to check if the answer is correct by taking the gradient of the potential (since ##- \nabla \phi = \vec{E}##), but it seems it is not. What was the mistake?


Q=ρV only works if you have a constant charge density. Because the density varies in this problem, you have to integrate to find the charge enclosed. But you don't need that here.

So for the case ##r>R## do I need to integrate to find ##Q_{enc}##?

##dQ= \rho dV = \rho 4 \pi r^2 dr = 4 \pi \alpha \int^R_0 r^4 dr##

##= \frac{4 \pi \alpha}{5} [r^5]^R_0 \implies Q= \frac{4 \pi \alpha R^5}{5}##​

The new density (a distance r away) would be:

##\rho'=Q.V'= \frac{4 \pi \alpha R^5}{5}. \frac{4\pi r^3}{3} = \frac{16 \pi^2 r^3 \alpha R^5}{15}##​

Hence the electric field is:

##\int \nabla \cdot \vec{E} dr = \int \frac{16 \pi^2 r^3 \alpha R^5}{15 \epsilon_0} dr##

##\therefore \vec{E} = \frac{16 \pi^2 r^4 \alpha R^5}{60 \epsilon_0} + C##

Is that right? And what sort of boundry conditions do we need to make the constant equal zero?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
roam said:
Thank you for the reply. But should it not be ##\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \rho / \epsilon_0## (divided by the permittivity of free space)?
Yes, sorry. I'm used to using units where you don't have to include the constant.

This is what I did:
\begin{align*}
\nabla \cdot \vec{E} &= \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} \\
\int \nabla \cdot \vec{E} &= \int \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} \implies \vec{E} = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3\epsilon_0}
\end{align*}
Is this right?
No. You've implied the electric field is radial, so you can write ##\vec{E} = E_r \hat{r}##. As you said in your first post, ##\nabla\cdot\vec E = \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r)##, so you get, for r<R,
$$\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r) = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}.$$ Solve that differential equation. You'll also have to treat the case where r>R.

For the potential I used Poisson's equation:

##\nabla^2 \phi = - \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} \implies \phi= \int \int \frac{- \alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0} dr dr = -\frac{\alpha}{\epsilon_0} (\frac{r^4}{12} + Cr + B)##

I tried to check if the answer is correct by taking the gradient of the potential (since ##- \nabla \phi = \vec{E}##), but it seems it is not. What was the mistake?[/SIZE]
So for the case ##r>R## do I need to integrate to find ##Q_{enc}##?

##dQ= \rho dV = \rho 4 \pi r^2 dr = 4 \pi \alpha \int^R_0 r^4 dr##

##= \frac{4 \pi \alpha}{5} [r^5]^R_0 \implies Q= \frac{4 \pi \alpha R^5}{5}##​

The new density (a distance r away) would be:

##\rho'=Q.V'= \frac{4 \pi \alpha R^5}{5}. \frac{4\pi r^3}{3} = \frac{16 \pi^2 r^3 \alpha R^5}{15}##​

Hence the electric field is:

##\int \nabla \cdot \vec{E} dr = \int \frac{16 \pi^2 r^3 \alpha R^5}{15 \epsilon_0} dr##

##\therefore \vec{E} = \frac{16 \pi^2 r^4 \alpha R^5}{60 \epsilon_0} + C##

Is that right? And what sort of boundry conditions do we need to make the constant equal zero?
 
  • Like
Likes roam
  • #5
vela said:
No. You've implied the electric field is radial, so you can write ##\vec{E} = E_r \hat{r}##. As you said in your first post, ##\nabla\cdot\vec E = \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r)##, so you get, for r<R,[/SIZE]
$$\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r) = \frac{\alpha r^2}{\epsilon_0}.$$ Solve that differential equation. You'll also have to treat the case where r>R.

Thank you. I'm not very familiar with differential equations. So this is what I've done:

##\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r) = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}## or

##\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2E_r) = \frac{\rho r^2}{\epsilon_0}##​

Integrating both sides:

##r^2 |E_r| = \frac{\rho r^3}{3 \epsilon_0} + C_0##

##|E_r| = \frac{\rho r}{3 \epsilon_0} + \frac{C_0}{r^2}##​

Therefore:

##E_{inside} = \frac{\alpha r^3}{3 \epsilon_0} + \frac{C_0}{r^2}##

##E_{outside} = \frac{C_0}{r^2}##

Is this correct? :confused:

What should I do with the constant C0? Do I just need to say it is zero since ##E (r \to \infty) =0##?

Also for the potential do I need to solve for ##\phi## in ##\frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r}) = \frac{- \rho}{\epsilon_0}##?
 
  • #6
You didn't integrate correctly. Remember ##\rho## is a function of ##r##.
 
  • #7
vela said:
You didn't integrate correctly. Remember ##\rho## is a function of ##r##.

My mistake, sorry. Thank you. This time before integrating I've substituted ##\rho(r) = \alpha r^2## and ##0## for r<R and r>R respectively.

##\frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r) = \frac{\alpha r^4}{\epsilon_0} \implies E_{in} = \frac{\alpha r^3}{5 \epsilon_0} + \frac{C_0}{r^2}##​

And:

##\frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 E_r) = 0 \implies E_{out} = \frac{C_1}{r^2}##
Is this alright now? The second expression was obtained by the fact that he integral of zero is a constant. I think it makes sense since the field outside a charged sphere is NOT zero (as I've seen from other problems).

Now since the solution of Poisson's equation in spherical coordinates is:

##\nabla^2 \phi = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r^2 \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r})##​

I calculated the potentials by writting ##\nabla^2 \phi = \rho(r) / \epsilon_0## (for instance for r<R I got ##\phi = - \frac{\alpha r^4}{20 \epsilon_0} - \frac{C_0}{r}##). Then I took their gradients and got back the electric field, so I believe the solutions are correct.

But what do we typically do with the constants?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
Looks good so far. To figure out what ##C_0## is, take the limit of ##E_\text{in}## as ##r \to 0##. There's no point charge at the origin, so we require that the electric field remain finite. This can only happen if ##C_0 = 0##. To determine ##C_1##, require that ##E_\text{in} = E_\text{out}## at ##r=R## because there's no surface charge density to cause a discontinuity in the electric field.

Another way to deal with the constants is to use definite integrals to avoid them in the first place. So for the electric field inside the sphere, you'd have
$$\int_0^r \frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2 E_r)\,dr = \int_0^r \frac{\alpha r^4}{\epsilon_0}.$$ Similarly, for outside the sphere, you'd have
$$\int_R^r \frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^2 E_r)\,dr = \int_R^r 0\,dr = 0.$$ Again, use the fact that ##E_\text{in}(R) = E_\text{out}(R)## at the boundary.
 
  • Like
Likes roam
  • #9
Thank you so much for the help. It makes perfect sense now. :)
 

Related to Gauss's Law (Differential Form)

1. What is Gauss's Law (Differential Form)?

Gauss's Law (Differential Form) is a fundamental law in electromagnetism that relates the electric field to the distribution of electric charge. It is a differential form of Gauss's Law, which is one of the four Maxwell's equations.

2. How is Gauss's Law (Differential Form) different from Gauss's Law (Integral Form)?

Gauss's Law (Differential Form) is a mathematical equation that relates the electric field to the charge density at any point in space, while Gauss's Law (Integral Form) relates the electric flux through a closed surface to the enclosed charge. Differential form is useful for calculating the electric field at a specific point, while integral form is useful for calculating the total electric field passing through a surface.

3. What is the significance of Gauss's Law (Differential Form) in physics?

Gauss's Law (Differential Form) is a fundamental law in electromagnetism and is one of the four Maxwell's equations. It is important in understanding the behavior of electric fields and their interactions with charged particles. It also has practical applications in various fields such as electronics, optics, and engineering.

4. How is Gauss's Law (Differential Form) derived?

Gauss's Law (Differential Form) is derived from the integral form of Gauss's Law using the divergence theorem. The divergence theorem states that the flux of a vector field through a closed surface is equal to the volume integral of the divergence of that field over the enclosed volume. By applying this theorem to the integral form of Gauss's Law, we can derive the differential form.

5. Can Gauss's Law (Differential Form) be used in all situations?

Gauss's Law (Differential Form) is valid in all situations where the electric field is static and the charge distribution is continuous. It can also be used in situations where the charge distribution is not continuous, but only if the electric field is known at all points around the charge distribution. In cases where the electric field is not static, the full form of Maxwell's equations must be used.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
546
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
874
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
357
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
797
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
2K
Back
Top