[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference rusure::math

Title:Mathematics at DEC
Moderator:RUSURE::EDP
Created:Mon Feb 03 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2083
Total number of notes:14613

734.0. "calculating electric dipole moments" by EAGLE1::BEST (R D Best, Systems architecture, I/O) Fri Jul 17 1987 17:28

How does one compute the dipole moment for an arbitrary configuration
of charges ?

For example, what are the dipole moments of the following
configurations ?

#1
	charge		@
	3*Q		( 0, 0 )
	-Q		( 0, 1 )
	-Q		( 1, 0 )

#2
	charge		@
	2*Q		( 0, 0 )
	-Q		( 0, 1 )
	-Q		( 1, 0 )

The part I'm confused about is that charge configuration #1 is
'unbalanced'.

Is it like mechanical couples where parts of the force can
paired up with an oppositely directed equal magnitude force on a different
line of action and the 'rest' of the force acts alone ?

For number two, is there a contribution of two +Q,-Q dipole moments per axis ? 
Or only one ? 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
734.1BEING::POSTPISCHILAlways mount a scratch monkey.Sun Jul 19 1987 13:4540
    Re .0:
    
    Consider that if you are far enough away from any configuration with a
    net charge (that is, a total charge that is not zero), the field is
    hard to distinguish from the field due to a charge at the center of the
    configuration (where the center is computed for the charges in the same
    way that centers of masses are computed).  The field varies closely
    with the inverse square of distance, and the components of the field
    that do not vary inversely with the square are small with respect to
    the size of the entire field.
    
    But if the total charge is zero, the normally dominating component (the
    unipole moment) is also zero.  In this case, the configuration may be
    modeled with a dipole.  The strength of the field varies inversely with
    the cube of distance, and other components are drowned out at
    sufficient distances.  (If the dipole moment turns out to be zero, you
    can go on to the quadrupole moment, and so on.)
    
    So, at sufficient distances, the more complex moments are not
    important.  But at moderate distances, you might model the
    configuration as a unipole with a dipole to make it more accurate than
    a unipole alone.  To find the dipole moment of the first configuration,
    first find its unipole moment (a charge of Q at (.2,.2)).  Then add the
    inverse of the unipole (a charge of -Q at the origin) to the
    configuration to remove it.  Then find the dipole moment of the new
    configuration. 

    We can find an estimate of the field for several dipoles by considering
    each dipole separately, finding its field, and adding the fields.  If
    the sum of fields of dipoles looks like a single field of a different
    dipole, then the configuration can be modeled with a single dipole.  I
    would guess this is the case, but I am too lazy to check it out at the
    moment.  If so, you can find the dipole moment just by finding the
    dipole moments of the individual dipoles and adding them (as vectors).
    This is the same as finding the dipole moment of a dipole consisting of
    the total negative charge at the center of the negative charges and the
    total positive charge at the center of the positive charges. 
                                                                

				-- edp
734.2ENGINE::ROTHMon Jul 20 1987 11:2716
    If the charges are rigidly coupled to each other then you would have
    to find the eigenvectors and eigenvalues just as in getting the
    moment of inertia from mechanics.  In both of the examples in .0
    the dipole moment will be the same, because of the symmetry.

    In 3 dimensions the field due to a set of charges near the origin has
    an elegant expression in terms of spherical harmonics; in 2 dimensions
    one only needs the usual harmonics in terms of Fourier series
    as a function of angle.

    My recollection of dielectrics is pretty rusty though.  I remember
    looking at a book called something like "Fields and Waves in Dielctrics"
    by Von Hippel - it may be worth checking the library for since there
    was a lot of neat material in it.

    - Jim