# Tag Info

17

The simple Newton-like explanation of dipole gravitational radiation unexistence is following. The gravitational analog of electric dipole moment is $$\mathbf d = \sum_{\text{particles}}m_{p}\mathbf r_{p}$$ The first time derivative $$\dot{\mathbf d} =\sum_{\text{particles}}\mathbf p_{p},$$ while the second one is $$\ddot{\mathbf d} = \sum_{\text{... 15 The "simplest" classical explanation I know is the van der Waals interaction described by Keesom between two permanent dipoles. Let us consider two permanent dipoles \vec{p}_1 (located at O_1) and \vec{p}_2 located at O_2. Their potential energy of interaction is: U(\vec{p}_1,\vec{p}_2,\vec{O_1 O_2}) = -\vec{p}_1\cdot \vec{E}_2 = -\... 6 I'll give you the derivation from my book which includes a nice way to see how the delta functions arise: .............................................................................................................................................................. We can derive the potential field \vec{A} and the electromagnetic fields \vec{E} and \vec{... 6 Dipole moment is a vector and can be calculated using formula$$\vec{p} = \sum_i q_i \vec{r}_i.$$It can be shown easily using the formula above that in case of two charges separated by distance d$$\vec{p} = q \vec{d},$$where vector \vec{d} goes starts at negative ends at positive charge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_dipole_moment#... 6 I don't think you need quantum mechanics to understand what's going on in dipole-induced dipole interaction. The basic mechanism is quite simple and just the details of the calculations change by switching to a quantum description. Polarizable molecule in an external field So first things first. Let us consider a simple model of polarizable molecule as ... 5 Because the black area is half the box below. To explain: move the dipole from an area of no field to an area of field strength E. As you do, there's a force proportional to the dipole moment and to the gradient of E. For a fixed dipole, this force depends only on the gradient (horizontal dashed line). But for an induced dipole, the dipole moment depends ... 5 The electric dipole moment is defined as$$p = \int r \;\mathrm dq$$In the case of a pair of charges for which both charges are of the same magnitude, the choice of the origin turns out to be irrelevant:$$ p = \mathbf{r_1} q - \mathbf{r_2} q = q(\mathbf{r_1} - \mathbf{r_2}) = q\mathbf{d}$$where \mathbf{d} is the distance between the charges. ... 5 The water molecule is neutral on overall basis, i.e: the water molecule as a whole has no net charge. The water molecule is not linear rather it has a bent shape with two hydrogens on the same side. This happens because of the lone-pair-bond-pair repulsions. The oxygen has is a more electronegative element than hydrogen, i.e: oxygen has high electron-... 4 The force on a dipole placed in an electrical field is given by \mathbf{F} = (\mathbf{p}\cdot \nabla)\mathbf{E} (see, e.g., Griffiths, 3rd edition, eq. 4.5). Recall that,$$ \nabla(\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{E}) = \mathbf{p}\times (\nabla\times \mathbf{E}) + \mathbf{E}\times(\nabla\times \mathbf{p})+(\mathbf{p}\cdot\nabla)\mathbf{E} + (\mathbf{E}\cdot\nabla)\...

4

Classically a non-pointlike spinning charged object possesses a magnetic dipole moment due to the fact that charged particles in the object are spinning around some axis. In contrast, the electron has a dipole moment that arises from its intrinsic spin angular momentum. As you point out, the electron has no internal structure, so the spin does not refer to ...

4

The potential energy in this case should be $U=+\vec{m}.\vec{B}$, hence the potential energy is minimized, as it should be. Here is the explanation: Let’s look at the derivation of interaction energy between magnetic dipole and magnetic field carefully. The dipole energy $U=-\vec{m}.\vec{B}$ is derived using principle of virtual work with an assumption ...

4

It is true that there is no (electrostatic) force between an electrified body and a body not electrified. (Let's ignore gravitational force for now.) It is also true that all bodies (in earth or earth-like environment) are electrified or will be electrified if approached by another electrified body. But in general, not all bodies can be electrified. For ...

4

Here's one way to think about it (though it isn't mathematically rigorous). From very far away the dipole would appear to have zero charge and thus there wouldn't be an electric field at all. However, you also know that the electric field falls off as $1/r$, so from very far away you'd expect the electric field to be small. The additional charge ...

4

Earth's magnetic field isn't really a dipole, but a dynamic field due to the convection occurring in the planet's core (consists of molten iron). The model below shows a simulation of the magnetic field (blue is pointing towards the core while yellow points away), the cluster of curves in the middle is the planet's core. The geomagnetic pole is the ...

4

Very simply, the field of the positive and negative elements of the dipole "almost" cancel out - but not quite. It is because they are some small distance away that there is a residual (third order) term. You can see this by taking two charges $+q$ and $-q$ at a distance $2d$, and look at the field a distance $r$ from the center of the two (on the same axis)....

3

If the magnetic dipoles in a material are ordered, the material has a lower entropy because there are many fewer ways how the spins may be oriented if most of them (or all of them!) are required to be aligned. Such an alignment also reduces the heat capacity because before the dipoles got aligned, the orientation (direction) of each dipole was a degree of ...

3

Hint: Interaction energy of two dipoles : $$U=\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0r^3}\left( \mathbf{p}_1.\mathbf{p}_2-3\left ( \mathbf{p}_1.\hat r )(\mathbf{p}_2.\hat r\right) \right)$$

3

When an electric dipole is placed in a uniform electric field making an angle with the direction of the field as shown in the figure. Force on charge $-q=-q\overrightarrow{E}$ (opposite to $\overrightarrow{E}$) Force on charge $+q=q\overrightarrow{E}$ (along $\overrightarrow{E}$) Thus, electric dipole is under the action of two equal and unlike ...

3

It's a matter of choice. You can set the potential energy to be any value at any angle. You don't even have to have a zero-value at all; you could make $U$ purely positive or purely negative if you're feeling adventurous. But the advantage for $U(\pi/2)=0$ is, as you said, the simple expression $U(\theta)=-pE\cos\theta = -\vec p \cdot \vec E$ instead of $U(\... 3 You'd need to consider the angle between the two antennas and the distance between them. Dipole antennas do not radiate uniformly into$4\pi$. If you're looking up or down at the poles of the antenna, you will see no radiation (ideally). Looking at a direction transverse to this, the radiation is at a maximum. The angular dependence of the far (electric) ... 3 i searched for the exact same problem recently after a debate with one of my colleagues. In my opinion, you already gave the answer to your question yourself. A source dipole is the flow field resulting from a sink and a source brought together. In a sink, all streamlines point radially inward to the singularity at the origin, in a source, all point ... 3 The vector potential of an oscillating dipole (using the usual electric dipole approximation) can be written as $$\vec{A} =\frac{\mu_0 I_0 l}{4\pi r} \cos \omega(t-r/c)\ \hat{z},$$ where the dipole is of length$l$, with a current$I_0 \cos \omega t$and$\hat{z}$is a unit vector along the z-axis of the dipole. Using the Lorenz gauge one can then ... 3 Well, I recommend always use the definition to prove things. So, take the definition of superposition:$\psi_{net} = \psi_1 + \psi_2$. So, let two potentials be$V_1$and$V_2$. Since potentials obey superposition principle, the net potential is:$V_{net} = V_1 + V_2$. Now.. let two dipole moments be$p_1$and$p_2$. The net dipole: $$p = \int_{V_1+V_2}\... 3 You may be confusing torque and force. The force \vec{\mathrm{F}} is given by q\, \vec{\mathrm{E}}, so you can clearly see that the force is in different directions for the positive and negative charges, and is either parallel or antiparallel to the electric field. The torque \vec{\tau} about any point O is given by \vec{\mathrm{r}} \times \vec{\... 2 There are two misconceptions present in your explanation of the problem. N is not number of dipoles, but their volumetric density Q is not total charge, but equivalent charge at boundaries of the dielectric. The idea is that (a) dielectric of the area A and height L polarized homogeneously along its height and (b) two plan-parallel plates of the ... 2 Normally the transition amplitude is calculated with e^{i\vec{k}\vec{r}}. For "small" product \vec{k}\vec{r} one expands the exponential in Taylor series and one leaves only the "dipole" term in the transition amplitude calculation: \propto\vec{k}\cdot\langle\psi_1|\vec{r}|\psi_2\rangle . So it is a "dipole" part of the transition amplitude, which in ... 2 The position dependence comes in via the R in the following expression¹:$$ \vec E = \frac{3 \vec p \cdot \vec R}{4 \pi \varepsilon_0 R^3} \vec R - \frac{\vec p}{4 \pi \varepsilon_0 R^3}$$This makes sense, as the charge$q$also does not depend on distance - it’s effect on the electric field$\vec E$, however, does depend on said distance and the ... 2 Nope. The electron dipole moment is defined as its intrinsic property – a property that may be imagine as a consequence of the particle's internal structure or, more generally, "something that happens inside it". So you may imagine that the relevant wave function for the "center of mass" is$\delta^{(3)}(\vec r)\$. It's not literal because one can't localize ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible