Finding the Potential Between Two Coaxial Cylinders Using Laplace's Equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving for the electric potential between two coaxial cylinders using Laplace's equation. The boundary conditions are specified as V(a, φ) = 2 cos φ and V(b, φ) = 12 sin φ. The solution method involves separation of variables, leading to a potential function that includes both r and 1/r terms. There is uncertainty about eliminating the r^{-k} term due to the origin's position and the necessity of k=1 in the summation. The participants emphasize the importance of correctly applying the boundary conditions for k=1 to ensure nontrivial solutions.
cscott
Messages
778
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Two coaxial cylinders, radii {a,b} where b>a. Find the potential between the two cylinder surfaces.

Boundary conditions:
V(a,\phi) = 2 \cos \phi
V(b,\phi) = 12 \sin \phi

Homework Equations



Solution by separation of variables:
V(r,\phi) = a_0 + b_0 \ln s + \sum_k \left[ r^k(a_k \cos k\phi + b_k \sin k\phi)+r^{-k}(c_k\cos k\phi + d_k \sin k\phi)\right]

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't think I can eliminate the r^{-k} term because the origin isn't between the two cylinders.

I think k=1 is the only term in the summation that is required for the solution.

V(r,\phi) = r(a_1 \cos \phi + b_1 \sin \phi)+\frac{1}{r}(c_1\cos \phi + d_1 \sin \phi)

I don't see how to have the cosines vanish for V(b) and sines vanish for V(a) because of the common k in both.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You should actually write down the boundary conditions for k=1. There are nontrivial solutions.
 
I made a typo in my boundary conditions

Boundary conditions (in volts):
V(a,\phi) = 2 \cos \phi
V(b,\phi) = 12 \sin \phiTaking V(r,\phi)_{k=1} gives,
V(r,\phi) = r(a_1 \cos \phi + b_1 \sin \phi)+\frac{1}{r}(c_1\cos \phi + d_1 \sin \phi)

I will take a look at this...
 
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