Help with Jackson Electrodynamics Notation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding Jackson's notation in electrodynamics, particularly regarding the Dirac delta function and Green's theorem. The user, coming from an engineering background, finds the integration involving the delta function confusing, especially why the result is expressed at x instead of x'. They clarify that in Problem 2.7, unprimed coordinates represent the viewpoint for potential calculation, while primed coordinates indicate the location of the charge. The user seeks confirmation on this interpretation and further clarification on the delta function's application in Jackson's equations. Overall, the thread highlights the challenges faced by those transitioning from engineering to physics notation.
montyhp
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I am having some difficulty with Jackson's notation.

I am coming from an engineering (not physics) background.

First of all, on Page 36 at the bottom of the page, Jackson uses the Dirac delta function d(x-x'). When he integrates his answer is the function at x instead of at x' as I would expect from the discussion on Page 26. Maybe this doesn't matter, but remember, you are talking to an engineer, so I need to understand the physical relevance.

My real question is, when Jackson starts working with Green's theorem, he uses x' as the location of his point charge in "Green Space" and as his integration variable. He then makes is integrals over d3x' and da'. Then he takes n' to be his normal vector and changes it to z' (n'=-z'). I understand why n=-z, but I don't understand the physical significance of the prime in this case. I still think that the prime refers to the location of the point charge in "Green Space".

Homework Equations



See Above

The Attempt at a Solution



This is in reference to problem 2.7 which I am working, but I am not asking for a solution. Just need help with the concept.

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
OK so I wrestled with Jackson Problem 2.7c some more and I think I have come to the following realization (is this right?):

The unprimed coordinates (r,th,z) are the location where we are trying to find the potential (our viewpoint). The primed coordinates (r',th',z') are the location of the charge on the disk (which is why we integrate in the primed coordinates because we are integrating to find the charge distribution). So in Problem 2.7c where we have to find the potential along the z axis, we set unprimed r=0 and integrate WRT r' (and th') over the surface of the disk. At least that gives me the correct answer.

Is that correct?

Also, I still don't understand why Jackson P 36 (blue version) seems to interpret the delta function "backwards" in eq 1.36. Can anyone help me with that?
 
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