-1
$\begingroup$

We've a piece of dielectric parallel to the polarisation $P$ , in two cases as in the figure we take a slice of it, one a perpendicular cut the other an oblique one.

enter image description here

The charge on the surface $q$ is said to be the same for both cases ,why is that so?

Here is the full paragraph from griffiths

To calculate the actual amoumt of bound charge resulting from a given polarization, examine a "tube" of dielectric parallel to $P$. The dipole moment of the tiny chunk shown in Fig $4.12$ is $P(A d)$, where $A$ is the cross-sectional area of the tube and $d$ is the length of the chunk. In tems of the charge $(q)$ at the end. this same dipole moment can be written $q d .$ The bound charge that piles up at the right end of the tube is therefore $$ q=P A $$ If the ends have been sliced off perpendicularly, the surface charge density is $$ \sigma_{b}=\frac{q}{A}=P $$ For an oblique cut (Fig. $4.13$ ), the charge is still the same but $A=A_{\text {end }} \cos \theta$, so $$ \sigma_{b}=\frac{q}{A_{\text {end }}}=P \cos \theta=\mathbf{P} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{n}} . $$ The effect of the polarization, then, is to paint a bound charge $\alpha_{b}=\mathrm{P} \cdot \mathrm{n}$ over surface of the material. This is exactly what we found by more rigorous mearis Seet. $4.2,1$. But now we know where the bound charge cames from.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

That is because the cross-sectional area of the diagonal slice is larger than that of the perpendicular slice by a factor of $\sec{\theta}$, which exactly cancels out the $\cos{\theta}$ in the dot-product.

The area of the oblique surface, which is an ellipse, is $\pi \, a\, b$, where $a$ and $b$ are the two axes of the ellipse. If the diameter of the tube is $2r$, it is straightforward to see that $a = r$, whereas $b = r/\cos{\theta}$. This means the area of the oblique surface is $$\mathbf{A'} = \pi \, a\, b \, \mathbf{\hat{n}} = \frac{\pi \, r^2}{\cos{\theta}}\, \mathbf{\hat{n}}.$$

Now, the charge on the oblique surface is given by $$q' = \mathbf{P} \cdot \mathbf{A'} = \frac{\pi \, r^2}{\cos{\theta}} \,\mathbf{P} \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}} = \frac{\pi \, r^2}{\cos{\theta}} P \cos{\theta} = P \, \pi \, r^2 = P \, A,$$ where $A = \pi \, r^2$ is the area of the perpendicular surface in the first case.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ You've assumed $q' = \mathbf{P} \cdot \mathbf{A'} = $ but that's what I wanted to prove. $\endgroup$
    – Kashmiri
    Commented Apr 20, 2021 at 14:10
  • $\begingroup$ Nope, that is not an assumption -- polarization is equal to the bound charge per area by definition. This means charge is the dot product of the polarization and the area vector. The way you have written your question, you want to see if the bound charge on the oblique surface is the same as that for a normal surface, which is what I have proven. $\endgroup$
    – Yejus
    Commented Apr 20, 2021 at 15:12
  • $\begingroup$ Please see the complete paragraph from Griffiths now. He claims that the charge is the same and then proves that $q=P.n$. But your attempt assumes $q=P.n$. and then proves charge is the same. But still this answer helped me see another angle. If possible could you please add your response now. Thank you. $\endgroup$
    – Kashmiri
    Commented Apr 21, 2021 at 3:45

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.