Potential energy of a continous charge distribution

AI Thread Summary
Finding the potential energy of a continuous charge distribution involves addressing the challenges posed by singularities, particularly the 1/r term in integrals near r=0. For a line of charge with linear density, the integral diverges, indicating that a finite cross-section is necessary to avoid infinite charge density. Assigning potential to objects requires them to have finite charge and dimensions, complicating calculations for distributions like conducting volumes where charge is on the surface. The discussion emphasizes that without finite dimensions, charge distributions can lead to non-physical scenarios with infinite densities. Understanding these limitations is crucial for accurately calculating potential energy in continuous charge distributions.
asdf60
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
How exactly does one find the potential energy of a charge distribution? More precisely, how does one get over the 1/r term in the integral goes crazy near r=0? Purcell says it is possible, but I'm not seeing how for an continuous distribution this is possible.

Consider for a line of length L with linear charge density p. Let's start just by finding the potential at on end of the line. It should be integral from 0 to L of (p*dx / x). Needless to say, the integral doesn't exist. What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The line has to have finite cross-section, otherwise the integral blows up. Moreover, you can only assign a potential to objects of finite charge and dimensions.
 
what about for something like a conducting volume, where the charge is distributed over the surface (and hence density is in terms of area not volume)?
 
Last edited:
Again, the surface has to have finite thickness. If you have some charge distribution spread over some region in space, then that region must have finite dimensions, or else you'll get places with infinite charge density (charge to volume ratio), and the integral over such 'singularities' will blow up.
 
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