List of centroids: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>Rmashhadi
No edit summary
 
Thought there was an error, changed it to find I was, in fact incorrect. undo change
Line 1: Line 1:
Hi there, I am Alyson Pomerleau and I think it sounds quite good when you say it. What I love performing is soccer but I don't have the time lately. Office supervising is where her main earnings comes from. Mississippi is exactly where his home is.<br><br>Here is my blog post: [http://010-5260-5333.com/index.php?document_srl=1880&mid=board_ALMP66 free psychic readings]
The '''uniqueness theorem''' for [[Poisson's equation]] states that the equation has a unique [[gradient]] of the solution for a large class of [[boundary condition]]s. In the case of [[electrostatics]], this means that if an [[electric field]] satisfying the boundary conditions is found, then it is the complete electric field.
__TOC__
==Proof==
In [[Gaussian units]], the general expression for [[Poisson's equation]] in [[electrostatics]] is
 
:<math>\mathbf{\nabla}\cdot(\epsilon \mathbf{\nabla}\varphi)= -4 \pi \rho_{f}</math>
 
Here <math>\varphi</math> is the [[electric potential]] and <math>\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi</math> is the [[electric field]].
 
The uniqueness of the gradient of the solution (the uniqueness of the electric field) can be proven for a large class of boundary conditions in the following way.
 
Suppose that there are two solutions <math>\varphi_{1}</math> and <math>\varphi_{2}</math>. One can then define <math>\phi=\varphi_{2}-\varphi_{1}</math> which is the difference of the two solutions. Given that both <math>\varphi_{1}</math> and <math>\varphi_{2}</math> satisfy [[Poisson's Equation]], <math>\phi</math> must satisfy
 
:<math>\mathbf{\nabla}\cdot(\epsilon \mathbf{\nabla}\phi)= 0</math>
 
Using the identity
 
:<math>\nabla \cdot (\phi \epsilon \, \nabla \phi )=\epsilon \, (\nabla \phi )^2 + \phi \nabla \cdot (\epsilon \, \nabla \phi )</math>
 
And noticing that the second term is zero one can rewrite this as
 
:<math>\mathbf{\nabla}\cdot(\phi\epsilon \mathbf{\nabla}\phi)= \epsilon (\mathbf{\nabla}\phi)^2</math>
 
Taking the volume integral over all space specified by the boundary conditions gives
 
:<math>\int_V \mathbf{\nabla}\cdot(\phi\epsilon \mathbf{\nabla}\phi) d^3 \mathbf{r}= \int_V \epsilon (\mathbf{\nabla}\phi)^2 \, d^3 \mathbf{r}</math>
 
Applying the [[divergence theorem]], the expression can be rewritten as
 
:<math>\sum_i \int_{S_i} (\phi\epsilon \mathbf{\nabla}\phi) \cdot \mathbf{dS}= \int_V \epsilon (\mathbf{\nabla}\phi)^2 \, d^3 \mathbf{r}</math>
 
Where <math>S_i</math> are boundary surfaces specified by boundary conditions.
 
Since <math>\epsilon > 0</math> and <math>(\mathbf{\nabla}\phi)^2 \ge 0</math>, then <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\phi</math> must be zero everywhere (and so <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi_{1} = \mathbf{\nabla}\varphi_{2}</math>) when the surface integral vanishes.
 
This means that the gradient of the solution is unique when
 
:<math>\sum_i \int_{S_i} (\phi\epsilon \, \mathbf{\nabla}\phi) \cdot \mathbf{dS} =
0</math>
 
The boundary conditions for which the above is true are:
 
# [[Dirichlet boundary condition]]: <math>\varphi</math> is well defined at all of the boundary surfaces. As such <math>\varphi_1=\varphi_2</math> so at the boundary <math>\phi = 0</math> and correspondingly the surface integral vanishes.
# [[Neumann boundary condition]]: <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi</math> is well defined at all of the boundary surfaces. As such <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi_1=\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi_2</math> so at the boundary <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\phi=0</math> and correspondingly the surface integral vanishes.
# Modified [[Neumann boundary condition]] (also called [[Robin boundary condition]] - conditions where boundaries are specified as conductors with known charges): <math>\mathbf{\nabla}\varphi</math> is also well defined by applying locally [[Gauss's Law]]. As such, the surface integral also vanishes.
# Mixed boundary conditions (a combination of Dirichlet, Neumann, and modified Neumann boundary conditions): the uniqueness theorem will still hold.
 
==See also==
*[[Poisson's equation]]
*[[Gauss's law]]
*[[Coulomb's law]]
*[[Method of images]]
*[[Green's function]]
*[[Uniqueness theorem]]
*[[Spherical harmonics]]
 
==References==
*{{cite book
|author=L.D. Landau, E.M. Lifshitz
|year=1975
|title=The Classical Theory of Fields
|edition=4th |volume=Vol. 2
|publisher=[[Butterworth–Heinemann]]
|isbn=978-0-7506-2768-9
}}
*{{cite book
|author=J. D. Jackson
|year=1998
|title=Classical Electrodynamics
|edition=3rd
|publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]]
|isbn=978-0-471-30932-1
}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Uniqueness Theorem}}
[[Category:Electrostatics]]
[[Category:Vector calculus]]

Revision as of 17:08, 26 September 2013

The uniqueness theorem for Poisson's equation states that the equation has a unique gradient of the solution for a large class of boundary conditions. In the case of electrostatics, this means that if an electric field satisfying the boundary conditions is found, then it is the complete electric field.

Proof

In Gaussian units, the general expression for Poisson's equation in electrostatics is

(ϵφ)=4πρf

Here φ is the electric potential and E=φ is the electric field.

The uniqueness of the gradient of the solution (the uniqueness of the electric field) can be proven for a large class of boundary conditions in the following way.

Suppose that there are two solutions φ1 and φ2. One can then define ϕ=φ2φ1 which is the difference of the two solutions. Given that both φ1 and φ2 satisfy Poisson's Equation, ϕ must satisfy

(ϵϕ)=0

Using the identity

(ϕϵϕ)=ϵ(ϕ)2+ϕ(ϵϕ)

And noticing that the second term is zero one can rewrite this as

(ϕϵϕ)=ϵ(ϕ)2

Taking the volume integral over all space specified by the boundary conditions gives

V(ϕϵϕ)d3r=Vϵ(ϕ)2d3r

Applying the divergence theorem, the expression can be rewritten as

iSi(ϕϵϕ)dS=Vϵ(ϕ)2d3r

Where Si are boundary surfaces specified by boundary conditions.

Since ϵ>0 and (ϕ)20, then ϕ must be zero everywhere (and so φ1=φ2) when the surface integral vanishes.

This means that the gradient of the solution is unique when

iSi(ϕϵϕ)dS=0

The boundary conditions for which the above is true are:

  1. Dirichlet boundary condition: φ is well defined at all of the boundary surfaces. As such φ1=φ2 so at the boundary ϕ=0 and correspondingly the surface integral vanishes.
  2. Neumann boundary condition: φ is well defined at all of the boundary surfaces. As such φ1=φ2 so at the boundary ϕ=0 and correspondingly the surface integral vanishes.
  3. Modified Neumann boundary condition (also called Robin boundary condition - conditions where boundaries are specified as conductors with known charges): φ is also well defined by applying locally Gauss's Law. As such, the surface integral also vanishes.
  4. Mixed boundary conditions (a combination of Dirichlet, Neumann, and modified Neumann boundary conditions): the uniqueness theorem will still hold.

See also

References

  • 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534
  • 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534