Understanding the energy of a dipole in a uniform electric field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the energy of a dipole in a uniform electric field, specifically addressing Griffith's E&M problem 4.7. The confusion arises from the assumption that the energy/work done to construct the dipole is equivalent to dragging two point charges in the field, which is incorrect as it overlooks the internal energy of the dipole. The correct approach focuses solely on the interaction energy between the dipole and the electric field, excluding the energy associated with assembling the dipole itself. It is emphasized that the potential energy of an ideal dipole in an electric field should reduce to zero under specific conditions, confirming that only changes in potential energy matter. Ultimately, the conventional expression for potential energy reflects the dipole's orientation relative to the electric field.
offscene
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Griffith's E&M, problem 4.7: Show that the energy of an ideal dipole p in an electric field E is given by $$U=-p \cdot E$$
Relevant Equations
$$W=qV$$
$$V(r) = -\int_{\textrm{reference (take as infinity)}}^{r} E \cdot dl$$
Griffith's E&M problem 4.7 asks to calculate the energy of a dipole in a uniform electric field and I ended up getting a different answer than the one given. I thought that calculating the energy/work done to construct the dipole is the same as dragging two point charges where one is d apart from the other (please correct me if I am wrong) under the effect of a constant electric field. This should be done by just being able to drag the first with just the constant E-field acting on it and then dragging in the second charge (opposite sign) which has both the contribution from the constant E-field as well as the other charge that has already been placed. However, the answer does not come out to be correct if I include the contribution of the field from the already placed charge and I am confused as to why we can ignore this. (Essentially, I am getting the same answer as stated but with an additional term due to the potential of the other charge itself)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is simply that the "energy of a dipole in an electric field" only includes the interaction energy, not the internal energy of the dipole. In real life, most dipoles are not built from two elementary charges, so calculating the total energy of a system of charges is more complicated.
 
  • Like
Likes offscene and topsquark
Your approach of starting from "scratch", i.e. only charges at infinity to start with, is OK if you do it consistently and you don't lose track of your goal. If you want to be consistent, you should also consider the energy involved in separating the positive from the negative charges in order to create the uniform field in the region of interest. That would be consistent with your approach, but it would be a complicated calculation that is unnecessary. Read on.

Your goal is to find the potential energy of "an ideal dipole in an electric field". Whichever way you derive the expression, it should reduce identically to zero in two cases:
  1. There is no electric field, i.e. ##\mathbf{E}=0##. This excludes the energy of assembling the charges to create the external field. You correctly ignored this term.
  2. There is no dipole, i.e. ##\mathbf{p}=0##. This excludes the energy of assembling the two charges to create the dipole. You did not ignore this term but you should have as @DrClaude already remarked.
You don't show the potential that you derived. Assuming that you derived it correctly, it should be reducible to the form ##~U=-\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{E}+U_0~## where ##U_0## is a constant energy that does not depend on the orientation of the dipole relative to the electric field. Since the zero of potential energy is arbitrary and only changes in potential energy matter, one simply redefines ##U_0=0## to describe the potential energy of "an ideal dipole in an electric field". The conventional form of this potential energy is zero when the dipole moment is oriented perpendicular to the external electric field.
 
  • Like
Likes offscene, DrClaude and topsquark
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top