Checking my result in EM -finding a potential-

In summary: Jackson's book is helpful in solving this type of problem because it provides a description for each term in the potential and helps to determine the coefficients of the potential.
  • #1
fluidistic
Gold Member
3,949
264

Homework Statement


Consider 2 conductor hollow spheres that share the same center, of radii a and b (a>b). The hollow sphere of radius b is at zero potential while the hollow sphere of radius a has a potential of the form [itex]V(\theta, \phi ) =V_0 \sin \theta \cos \phi[/itex]. Where [itex]V_0[/itex] is a constant and theta and phi are the spherical coordinates. Find the potential in all the space.

Homework Equations


Tons.

The Attempt at a Solution


For the region [itex]0 \leq r \leq b, \Phi (r, \theta , \phi )=0[/itex] because the E field there is 0 (due to the conductivity of the inner sphere) and thus the potential is constant and worth the same as the surface of the inner sphere, namely 0.
Now I attack the region between the 2 spheres.
I notice that there isn't any azimuthal symmetry, hence the book of Griffith is of no big help, unless I missed out a chapter. I therefore use Jackson's book only to get some help.
I propose a solution of the form [itex]\Phi (r, \theta , \phi ) = \sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l [A_{lm}r^l+B_{lm }r^{-(l+1 )}] Y_{lm} (\theta , \phi )[/itex] where [itex]Y _{lm} (\theta, \phi )[/itex] are the spherical harmonics.
The first boundary condition is [itex]\Phi (a,\theta , \phi ) =0 \Rightarrow \sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l [A_{lm}b^l+B_{lm }b^{-(l+1 )}] Y_{lm}=0[/itex].
Here I'm not 100% of what I've done. Namely, I say that since the spherical harmonics are linearly independent, the only way to get the infinite series as vanishing, is the condition that [itex]A_{lm}b^l+B_{lm }b^{-(l+1 )}=0[/itex]. Thus [itex]A_{lm}=-B_{lm}b^{-2l-1}[/itex].
Now my goal is to determine [itex]B_{lm}[/itex], I'd be done with the problem if I succeed in doing so.
I use the second boundary condition: [itex]V_0\sin \theta \cos \phi =\sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l B_{lm} [a^{-(l+1)}-b^{-2l-1 }a^l] Y_{lm } (\theta , \phi ) [/itex].
I call [itex]C_{lm}=B_{lm}[a^{-(l+1)}-b^{-2l-1}a^l][/itex] for convenience.
Seeking help in Jackson's book, [itex]P_l (\cos \gamma )=\sum _{m=-l}^l C_ m (\theta ', \phi ')Y_{lm} (\theta , \phi )=V_0 \sin \theta \cos \phi[/itex] and [itex]C_{ml}=C_m[/itex] doesn't depend on l. Gamma is the angle between 2 arbitrary vectors [itex]\vec x[/itex] and [itex]\vec x '[/itex] inside the region, namely [itex]\cos \gamma = \cos \theta \cos \theta ' + \sin \theta \sin \theta ' \cos (\phi - \phi ') [/itex].
If I understood well Jackson's book, [itex]C_m (\theta ', \phi ' ) = \int Y^* _{lm} P_l (\cos \gamma ) d \Omega[/itex] (so that it's a double integral-surface integral- and the * denotes the complex conjugate).
Therefore [itex]B_ {lm} = \frac{C_m (\theta ' , \theta ) }{a^{-(l+1 )}-b^{-2l-1}a^l}[/itex]. Replacing this into the original ansatz yields [tex]\Phi (r, \theta , \phi ) = \sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l \frac{\int Y ^ * _{lm}(\theta , \phi ) P_l ( \cos \gamma ) d \Omega }{a^{-(l+1 )}-b^{-2l-1}a^l} [r^{-(l+1)}-b^{-2l-1}r^l]Y_{lm} (\theta , \phi )[/tex] which would be my final answer.
Since [itex]P_l (\cos \gamma ) =V_0 \sin \theta \cos \phi[/itex], at first glance when r=b, Phi is worth 0 as it should while when r=a, I think that [itex]\Phi[/itex] is worth [itex]V_0 \sin \theta \cos \phi[/itex] as it should too. I wonder if my answer is correct. That was a pretty tough problem to me and it's the first in the long list (~30) I should do.
Thanks for any comment.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
For this type of problem, the usual route is to use the same trick as you used here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=603238. From what I've read I don't think you've seen how to apply this trick, so bear with me if you understand it and are well ahead of me.

For each choice of [itex]l[/itex] and [itex]m[/itex], you would use the orthogonality relationship between the spherical harmonics to determine the coefficients. That is, you integrate the potential over each of the two surfaces with respect to your given spherical harmonic, and use the fact that the right-hand side is zero by definition, except for when the two spherical harmonics match:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi} \int_0^{\pi} Y_{lm}^*(\theta,\phi) \Phi(r,\theta,\phi) d\theta d\phi = A_{lm} r^l + B_{lm} r^{-l-1}[/tex]
Obviously this won't change much for the one surface where the potential is zero, but it will help for the other surface. Now, the way to get really tricky is to notice that the fixed potential on the outer surface ([itex]r=b[/itex]) can itself be expressed in terms of one particular spherical harmonic; and that means you only need to actually evaluate one integral :)
 
  • #3
Steely Dan said:
For this type of problem, the usual route is to use the same trick as you used here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=603238. From what I've read I don't think you've seen how to apply this trick, so bear with me if you understand it and are well ahead of me.
I'm totally new in the subject, there's no way I have a clear understanding of what's going on (learned about the spherical harmonics yesterday).

For each choice of [itex]l[/itex] and [itex]m[/itex], you would use the orthogonality relationship between the spherical harmonics to determine the coefficients. That is, you integrate the potential over each of the two surfaces with respect to your given spherical harmonic, and use the fact that the right-hand side is zero by definition, except for when the two spherical harmonics match:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi} \int_0^{\pi} Y_{lm}^*(\theta,\phi) \Phi(r,\theta,\phi) d\theta d\phi = A_{lm} r^l + B_{lm} r^{-l-1}[/tex]
I think I did it explicitly thanks to Jackson's book but I'm not sure. Wouldn't that be my [itex]C_m (\theta ' , \phi ' )[/itex]?

Obviously this won't change much for the one surface where the potential is zero, but it will help for the other surface. Now, the way to get really tricky is to notice that the fixed potential on the outer surface ([itex]r=b[/itex]) can itself be expressed in terms of one particular spherical harmonic; and that means you only need to actually evaluate one integral :)
The outer surface in this problem (unlike the other problem I've tried to solve) is of radius a.
Hmm I see, I guess I should look at a table of the first spherical harmonics.
 
  • #4
fluidistic said:
I think I did it explicitly thanks to Jackson's book but I'm not sure. Wouldn't that be my [itex]C_m (\theta ' , \phi ' )[/itex]?

Well, the [itex]C_m[/itex] are not directly important in this problem insofar as you don't need to express any Legendre polynomials in terms of spherical harmonics when there's a much more direct route to solving this problem. If you do it your way, you should see that only one of those coefficients survives, instead of having to write the general series expression that you've written. But evaluating it for each possible value of [itex]m[/itex] is way too much work for this problem, when you can use the orthogonality relationship of the spherical harmonics. The way you've written it, it would not be obvious that only one term in that series actually survives.

The outer surface in this problem (unlike the other problem I've tried to solve) is of radius a.
Hmm I see, I guess I should look at a table of the first spherical harmonics.

Yes, it's one of the first few spherical harmonics. Their orthogonality relationship is obviously a bit more complicated than for the Legendre polynomials, but the algorithm for solving the problem is basically the same.
 
  • #5
Steely Dan said:
Well, the [itex]C_m[/itex] are not directly important in this problem insofar as you don't need to express any Legendre polynomials in terms of spherical harmonics when there's a much more direct route to solving this problem.
Hmm okay. Is my answer "right" though, but just "ugly" in the sense that it's not simplificated?
If you do it your way, you should see that only one of those coefficients survives, instead of having to write the general series expression that you've written. But evaluating it for each possible value of [itex]m[/itex] is way too much work for this problem, when you can use the orthogonality relationship of the spherical harmonics. The way you've written it, it would not be obvious that only one term in that series actually survives.
You mean in my expression for Phi in the series with the index "m"?
[tex]\Phi (r, \theta , \phi ) = \sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l \frac{\int Y ^ * _{lm}(\theta , \phi ) P_l ( \cos \gamma ) d \Omega }{a^{-(l+1 )}-b^{-2l-1}a^l} [r^{-(l+1)}-b^{-2l-1}r^l]Y_{lm} (\theta , \phi )[/tex]


Yes, it's one of the first few spherical harmonics. Their orthogonality relationship is obviously a bit more complicated than for the Legendre polynomials, but the algorithm for solving the problem is basically the same.
I think I understand their orthogonality and their normality. The inner product of 2 spherical harmonics is defined as an integral over a surface which is, if I'm not wrong, a sphere of radius 1.
Also I don't find the particular spherical harmonics representing the potential of the outer sphere. I'm almost sure m must equal plus or minus 1.
 
  • #6
fluidistic said:
Hmm okay. Is my answer "right" though, but just "ugly" in the sense that it's not simplificated?

You mean in my expression for Phi in the series with the index "m"?
[tex]\Phi (r, \theta , \phi ) = \sum _{l=0}^ \infty \sum _{m=-l}^l \frac{\int Y ^ * _{lm}(\theta , \phi ) P_l ( \cos \gamma ) d \Omega }{a^{-(l+1 )}-b^{-2l-1}a^l} [r^{-(l+1)}-b^{-2l-1}r^l]Y_{lm} (\theta , \phi )[/tex]

The steps you've taken are generally correct (although I don't think that last result is algebraically correct), but do not at all help you, because at the end you still don't have a form in which you can directly evaluate an integral relating to the potential at the outer surface. Let us write down the coefficients using the trick I described to figure them out:
[tex]B_{lm} = \frac{1}{a^l + a^{-l-1}} \int \Phi(a,\theta,\phi) Y^*_{lm} d\Omega[/tex]
[tex]A_{lm} = -b^{-2l-1} B_{lm}[/tex]
Substituting this into the main solution:
[tex]\Phi(r,\theta,\phi) = \sum_{l,m} \frac{\int \Phi(a,\theta,\phi) Y^*_{lm} d\Omega}{a^l + a^{-l-1}} \left[ -b^{-2l-1} r^l + r^{-l-1} \right] Y_{lm}[/tex]
This is definitely where you want to go with solving this problem, instead of the excursion to rewriting the spherical harmonics in terms of the Legendre polynomials.

I think I understand their orthogonality and their normality. The inner product of 2 spherical harmonics is defined as an integral over a surface which is, if I'm not wrong, a sphere of radius 1.
Also I don't find the particular spherical harmonics representing the potential of the outer sphere. I'm almost sure m must equal plus or minus 1.
Sorry for not being clearer about that -- look at [itex]Y^1_{\pm 1}[/itex]. The potential on the outer surface isn't quite either of those, but can you think of a linear combination of spherical harmonics that is?
 

FAQ: Checking my result in EM -finding a potential-

1. What is the purpose of checking my result in EM-finding a potential?

The purpose of checking your result in EM-finding a potential is to ensure the accuracy of your calculations and to verify the validity of your experimental data. It allows you to compare your predicted results with the actual results obtained from your experiment.

2. How do I check my result in EM-finding a potential?

To check your result in EM-finding a potential, you can use mathematical calculations and equations to determine the expected potential and then compare it to the actual measured potential from your experiment. You can also use computer simulations to visualize and analyze the results.

3. What factors can affect the accuracy of my result in EM-finding a potential?

There are several factors that can affect the accuracy of your result in EM-finding a potential, such as experimental errors, variations in equipment and materials, and environmental factors. It is important to control these variables as much as possible to ensure the reliability of your results.

4. How can I improve the accuracy of my result in EM-finding a potential?

To improve the accuracy of your result in EM-finding a potential, you can perform multiple trials and take the average of the results. You can also use more precise and calibrated equipment, as well as carefully control the experimental conditions and minimize potential sources of error.

5. What are some potential applications of EM-finding a potential in scientific research?

EM-finding a potential is a commonly used technique in scientific research, particularly in the fields of physics, chemistry, and engineering. It can be used to study the behavior of electric and magnetic fields, as well as to analyze the properties of materials and their interactions with electromagnetic radiation. It also has practical applications in technologies such as electrical circuits, sensors, and medical imaging devices.

Back
Top