Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a very simple problem: There is a charge $-q$ at $(0, 0, d)$ and $(0, 0, -d)$ as well a charge $2q$ at $(0, 0, 0)$. I have to calculate the quadrupole moment using spherical coordinates. I use $x=\cos(\phi)$.

The formula I build up is this: $$ q_{2,m} = \frac{(2-m)!}{(2+m)!} \frac{(-1)^{m+1}}8 \int_{-1}^1 \mathrm dx \, \left(1-x^2\right)^{m/2} \frac{\mathrm d^{2+m}}{\mathrm dx^{2+m}} \left(x^2-1\right)^2 $$ $$\times\int_0^{2\pi} \mathrm d \phi \, \mathrm e^{\mathrm im \phi} \int_0^\infty \mathrm dr \, r^2 \rho(r, x, \phi).$$

Is this even correct?

Then I tried to figure out what the $\rho$ has to be, this is what I currently believe to be correct: $$ \rho(r, x, \phi) = q \delta(\phi) \left[2 \delta(r) \delta(x-1) - \delta(r-d) \delta(x-1) - \delta(r-d) \delta(x+1)\right].$$

So now I would just need to calculate the integrals, right? The problem for positive $m$ would be that $\int \mathrm dx \, \delta(x-1) \left(1-x^2\right)^{m/2}$ would be zero. And $\int \mathrm dr \, r^2 \delta(r)$ would also be zero. So the $q_{2,1}$ and $q_{2,2}$ are zero.

I previously used the following charge density (although there was a negative radius): $$ \rho(r, x, \phi) = q \delta(x) \delta(\phi) \left[2\delta(r) - \delta(d-r) - \delta(d+r)\right].$$

And I got: $$ q_{2,-2} = 3! q d^2 ,\quad q_{2,-1} = 0 ,\quad q_{2,0} = -q d^2 ,\quad q_{2,1} = 0 ,\quad q_{2,2} = \frac 14 qd^2. $$

In one of the books, it says that only the $Q_{3,3}$ element of the tensor would be non-zero.

So how can I obtain the correct answer here?

share|cite|improve this question
By symmetry, only the $q_{2,0}$ will contribute to the quadrupole moments, and it will be the leading term to the multipole expansion. The $m=\pm 2$ components require that the charge change sign after a $90^\circ$ rotation, like you would get with unit charges at $(\pm1,0,0)$, positive, and $(0,\pm1,0)$, negative. – Emilio Pisanty Nov 7 '12 at 20:21
If I have the $\delta(x-1)$ and $\delta(x+1)$, I will still have 0 for $m=0$. If I take $\delta(x)$, i should have a nonzero answer. Which $x$ do I have to choose in the origin? – Martin Ueding Nov 7 '12 at 20:29
There's some additional obvious problems with your answer. For one, the $q_{2,\pm2}$ components must always be complex conjugates (i.e. equal if they're real) for the total field to be real-valued. This comes about because $Y_{l,-m}=Y_{lm}^\ast$ as $Y_{lm}\propto e^{im\phi}$. – Emilio Pisanty Nov 7 '12 at 20:52
Ah! yes, you're using $x=\cos\theta$. Those multiple delta functions looked funny but they are in fact OK. That use for $x$ in this context is quite misleading; more traditional notations are e.g. $u$ or $v$. – Emilio Pisanty Nov 7 '12 at 20:54
up vote 2 down vote accepted

I would say the quickest route would be to use the multipole expansion for the potentials of the different charges and then add those up. Thus you'd use $$ \frac{1}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}=\sum_{l=0}^\infty\sum_{m=-l}^l\frac{ 4\pi}{2l+1} \frac{r'^l}{r^{l+1}}Y_{lm}^\ast(\theta',\phi')Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi), $$ valid for $r>r'$ (see Jackson, 2nd ed., p.111, eq 3.70). To implement this, take $\mathbf{r}'=(0,0,\pm d)$, so that $\theta'=0,\pi$ and $\phi'$ is irrelevant. Then $Y_{lm}^\ast(\theta',\phi')$ is zero unless $m=0$, so you have $$ Y_{lm}^\ast(\theta',\phi')=\delta_{m,0}N_{lm}P_l(\cos\theta)=\delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2l+1}{4\pi}}P_l(\pm1)=\delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2l+1}{4\pi}}(\pm1)^l. $$ Thus, in this case, $$ \frac{1}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}=\sum_{l=0}^\infty (\pm d)^l \sqrt{\frac{ 4\pi}{2l+1}} \frac{Y_{l0}(\theta,\phi)}{r^{l+1}}=\sum_{l=0}^\infty (\pm d)^l \frac{P_{l}(\cos\theta)}{r^{l+1}}. $$

If you put it all together, then, the $l=0$ components of the charges at $(0,0,\pm d)$ will cancel with the one at the origin (all the other multipole terms of which vanish, of course), and the $l=1$ terms will kill each other due to that sign. The full potential will therefore be $$ \Phi=q\sum_{l=2}^\infty \left[1+(-1)^l \right] d^l \frac{P_{l}(\cos\theta)}{r^{l+1}}=\sum_{k=0}^\infty 2q d^{2+2k} \frac{P_{2+2k}(\cos\theta)}{r^{3+2k}}. $$

Now, as to how to extract the multipole moments, it depends on what normalization you use. I would use a normalization as $$ \Phi=\sum_{l=0}^\infty\sum_{m=-l}^l q_{lm}\frac{Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)}{r^{l+1}}, $$ but it depends on what the multipolar fields are defined like in your book. Since the nonzero-$m$ terms have already vanished, we must have $q_{2,\pm1}=q_{2,\pm2}=0$ as the problem's symmetry demands (as I indicated already in the comments). The $m=0$ component is then simply $$q_{2,0}=2q d^2,$$ but, again, this depends on the normalization you're using.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.