0
$\begingroup$

Ring of Radius R with charge Q distributed having -Q charge in centre

Consider a semi circular ring with radius R and charge Q distributed uniformly on the ring boundary and now, -Q charge is introduced at the centre ( q=Q)

Now what I did was I split the ring up into many small segments of length 'dl' having charge 'dq' and I paired that up with -Q charge in middle and found resulting dipole.

Basically my integral is

$ \int dp = \lambda r^2 \int_{0}^{\pi} sin\theta d\theta$

Where, $\lambda$ is the charge per length of the ring and $d\theta$ is the small angle segments each $'dl'$ element spans

enter image description here

And $sin\theta$ factor accounts for the fact that only vertical component adds

Now, after all the calculations I got the right answer.

My Question

Why this method worked. As in, I started with premise of dipole moment formula however as far as I know you need two charges of equal magnitude separated by distance to apply that. Here definitely the '-Q' at the center and the 'dqs' distributed about the semi-circumference do not satisfy that condition.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

TL;DR: It works because the total charge on the ring is equal to the point charge in the center.

Polarization is not just defined for point charges. In general, for any charge distribution $\rho(\vec{r})$ the dipole moment is defined as $$\vec{P} = \int d^dx\ \vec{r} \rho(\vec{r})\tag{1},$$ where $d$ is the dimension of your system. In your case d=2, the plane, but it reduces into a 1d integral becasue you can write $\rho(\vec{r}) = -q \delta(\vec{r}) + \lambda \delta(|r|-R)\theta(y)$. This is just the sum of the negative point charge at the center and the semi-circle charge that exist only on the upper half plane. Putting this into (1) gives you the answer you already have. Good. As another quick, and easier, example, if we have 2 point charges of opposite sign located at $\vec{r}_1$ and $\vec{r}_2$, then $\rho(\vec{r}) = +q \delta(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_1) - q \delta(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_2)$, and the integral reduces to the sum of these two points giving $\vec{P} = q(\vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2)$ which is the formula you are familiar with.

Now you are correct about (1) being only well defined when the total charge of the system is zero, that is when $Q =\int d^dx\rho(\vec{r}) = 0$. That is not hard to see, since when defining $\rho(\vec{r})$ one needs to pick an origin, and for the definition of the dipole to make any sense it must be indifferent to this chioce of coordinate system. Let's see how $\vec{P}$ change under such change of coordinates. If we let $\rho(\vec{r}) \rightarrow \rho(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_0)$, that is shifting our coordinate system by some vector $\vec{r}_0$. Then, $$\vec{P} \rightarrow \int d^dx\ \vec{r}\rho(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_0) = \int d^dx (\vec{r}+\vec{r}_0)\rho(\vec{r}) = \vec{P} + \vec{r}_0 Q, $$ and so, for the dipole moment to remain unchanged, the totoal charge $Q$ has to be zero. Notice that in both cases, the two point charges with opposite sign, and the point charge in the center and a semi-circle charge distribution around it, have net zero charge, and so the polarization is well defined.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I think I got the idea but I really wish you'd have explained the notation more. it's a bit hard for a high schooler like me to understand $\endgroup$
    – Brian
    Commented Jun 27, 2020 at 15:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, I didn't know what level of math you have. I think the most unfamiliar thing would be the $\delta$-function. It's a function that is 0 everywhere except for at a point. It's just the thing to describe point charges point charges only exist at a point. It's a bit of an over kill at that level. Suffice it to say that (1) can be taken as the definition of a dipole. The case of two point charges is a special case of (1), so is the integral formula you used in your question. It just takes a bit of math to see how. In both cases the total charge is zero, hence the dipole is well defined. $\endgroup$
    – A. Jahin
    Commented Jun 27, 2020 at 15:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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