Earnshaw’s Theorem and Ring of Charge












3












$begingroup$


A classic problem in determining the motion of a negative charge when displaced from a positively charged ring shows that the charge oscillates.



However, Earnshaw’s theorem states that (quoting Griffiths) ‘A charged particle cannot be held in stable equillibrium by electrostatic forces alone’. However, the system above seems to be stable. What causes this seemingly contradictory results?






homework-and-exercises electrostatics charge stability







share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
    $endgroup$
    – march
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Also read this and this.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago


















3












$begingroup$


A classic problem in determining the motion of a negative charge when displaced from a positively charged ring shows that the charge oscillates.



However, Earnshaw’s theorem states that (quoting Griffiths) ‘A charged particle cannot be held in stable equillibrium by electrostatic forces alone’. However, the system above seems to be stable. What causes this seemingly contradictory results?






homework-and-exercises electrostatics charge stability







share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
    $endgroup$
    – march
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Also read this and this.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago
















3












3








3


1



$begingroup$


A classic problem in determining the motion of a negative charge when displaced from a positively charged ring shows that the charge oscillates.



However, Earnshaw’s theorem states that (quoting Griffiths) ‘A charged particle cannot be held in stable equillibrium by electrostatic forces alone’. However, the system above seems to be stable. What causes this seemingly contradictory results?






homework-and-exercises electrostatics charge stability







share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




A classic problem in determining the motion of a negative charge when displaced from a positively charged ring shows that the charge oscillates.



However, Earnshaw’s theorem states that (quoting Griffiths) ‘A charged particle cannot be held in stable equillibrium by electrostatic forces alone’. However, the system above seems to be stable. What causes this seemingly contradictory results?






homework-and-exercises electrostatics charge stability




homework-and-exercises electrostatics charge stability






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









Qmechanic♦

106k121971227




106k121971227






New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









W.P.McBlainW.P.McBlain

182




182




New contributor




W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






W.P.McBlain is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
    $endgroup$
    – march
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Also read this and this.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
    $endgroup$
    – march
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Also read this and this.
    $endgroup$
    – harshit54
    2 days ago










1




1




$begingroup$
If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
$endgroup$
– march
2 days ago




$begingroup$
If you displace the particle along the axis that passes through the center of the ring and perpendicular to the plane of the ring, you get a restoring force. However, it seems likely that if you displace the particle instead in the plane of the ring towards one part of the ring, there is no restoring force; instead, there's a force pointed toward the nearest part of the ring. That's my guess.
$endgroup$
– march
2 days ago












$begingroup$
Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
$endgroup$
– harshit54
2 days ago






$begingroup$
Earnshaw's Theorem according to wikipedia is applicable on point charges. However even in this case, why do you think that the ring will remain stationary? You will require a force to hold it in place.
$endgroup$
– harshit54
2 days ago






1




1




$begingroup$
Also read this and this.
$endgroup$
– harshit54
2 days ago






$begingroup$
Also read this and this.
$endgroup$
– harshit54
2 days ago












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

Displacement along the symmetry axis results in a restoring force along the symmetry axis as you have calculated.



Now ask what happens if it is displaced radially?



Answer: the charge is unstable to radial displacements.



The theorem is proved in 3D space, so a problem confined to a single dimension is not subject to it. If you take the same geometry and consider it in 3D the theorem holds.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    Classically, introducing extended objects such as a ring also introduces additional forces: The ring is held together by elastic forces working against the positive charge distribution which pushes against itself. Without it, the ring will expand indefinitely.



    On the other hand, I am not sure if the statement holds quantum-mechanically, as one may argue that all "contact" forces are electromagnetic in nature.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      A negative charge in the centre of a positively charged ring is in a metastable state, so not stable Any deviation form this perfect geometry will lead to collapse. The theorem applies.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "151"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });






        W.P.McBlain is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468311%2fearnshaw-s-theorem-and-ring-of-charge%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        3












        $begingroup$

        Displacement along the symmetry axis results in a restoring force along the symmetry axis as you have calculated.



        Now ask what happens if it is displaced radially?



        Answer: the charge is unstable to radial displacements.



        The theorem is proved in 3D space, so a problem confined to a single dimension is not subject to it. If you take the same geometry and consider it in 3D the theorem holds.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$


















          3












          $begingroup$

          Displacement along the symmetry axis results in a restoring force along the symmetry axis as you have calculated.



          Now ask what happens if it is displaced radially?



          Answer: the charge is unstable to radial displacements.



          The theorem is proved in 3D space, so a problem confined to a single dimension is not subject to it. If you take the same geometry and consider it in 3D the theorem holds.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$
















            3












            3








            3





            $begingroup$

            Displacement along the symmetry axis results in a restoring force along the symmetry axis as you have calculated.



            Now ask what happens if it is displaced radially?



            Answer: the charge is unstable to radial displacements.



            The theorem is proved in 3D space, so a problem confined to a single dimension is not subject to it. If you take the same geometry and consider it in 3D the theorem holds.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Displacement along the symmetry axis results in a restoring force along the symmetry axis as you have calculated.



            Now ask what happens if it is displaced radially?



            Answer: the charge is unstable to radial displacements.



            The theorem is proved in 3D space, so a problem confined to a single dimension is not subject to it. If you take the same geometry and consider it in 3D the theorem holds.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            dmckee♦dmckee

            75k6135272




            75k6135272























                1












                $begingroup$

                Classically, introducing extended objects such as a ring also introduces additional forces: The ring is held together by elastic forces working against the positive charge distribution which pushes against itself. Without it, the ring will expand indefinitely.



                On the other hand, I am not sure if the statement holds quantum-mechanically, as one may argue that all "contact" forces are electromagnetic in nature.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$


















                  1












                  $begingroup$

                  Classically, introducing extended objects such as a ring also introduces additional forces: The ring is held together by elastic forces working against the positive charge distribution which pushes against itself. Without it, the ring will expand indefinitely.



                  On the other hand, I am not sure if the statement holds quantum-mechanically, as one may argue that all "contact" forces are electromagnetic in nature.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$
















                    1












                    1








                    1





                    $begingroup$

                    Classically, introducing extended objects such as a ring also introduces additional forces: The ring is held together by elastic forces working against the positive charge distribution which pushes against itself. Without it, the ring will expand indefinitely.



                    On the other hand, I am not sure if the statement holds quantum-mechanically, as one may argue that all "contact" forces are electromagnetic in nature.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    Classically, introducing extended objects such as a ring also introduces additional forces: The ring is held together by elastic forces working against the positive charge distribution which pushes against itself. Without it, the ring will expand indefinitely.



                    On the other hand, I am not sure if the statement holds quantum-mechanically, as one may argue that all "contact" forces are electromagnetic in nature.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered 2 days ago









                    QuantumnessQuantumness

                    461117




                    461117























                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        A negative charge in the centre of a positively charged ring is in a metastable state, so not stable Any deviation form this perfect geometry will lead to collapse. The theorem applies.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$


















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          A negative charge in the centre of a positively charged ring is in a metastable state, so not stable Any deviation form this perfect geometry will lead to collapse. The theorem applies.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$
















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            A negative charge in the centre of a positively charged ring is in a metastable state, so not stable Any deviation form this perfect geometry will lead to collapse. The theorem applies.






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            A negative charge in the centre of a positively charged ring is in a metastable state, so not stable Any deviation form this perfect geometry will lead to collapse. The theorem applies.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered 2 days ago









                            my2ctsmy2cts

                            5,7222719




                            5,7222719






















                                W.P.McBlain is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                draft saved

                                draft discarded


















                                W.P.McBlain is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                W.P.McBlain is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                W.P.McBlain is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid …



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468311%2fearnshaw-s-theorem-and-ring-of-charge%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                -

                                Popular posts from this blog

                                數位音樂下載

                                Image
                                數位音樂下載 為非以「實體」方式來販賣音樂的相關產品，而使用數位格式如mp3、AAC等文件格式來進行銷售販賣的一种音乐产业形式。著名的數位音樂下載服務商有iTunes Store、RecoChoku、Google Play音乐和微软Zune等。数字音乐下载在二十一世纪初一度风靡全球， [1] [2] 使得传统唱片产业走向衰落，但其自身也在2010年代流媒体音乐服务如Apple Music、Spotify等的挤压下迅速失去市场份额。 [3] [4] 数字音乐下载有便于携带、传播迅速、制作简单成本低等优点，与流媒体音乐相比也能更好保障音乐人权益； [5] 但它同时很可能带来侵犯版权和滥用的情形， [6] 也给音乐产业带来了诸多不利影响。数字音乐下载为音乐人和乐迷提供了更加便捷直接的交流渠道，也一定程度上推动了网络音乐人的出现和独立音乐的迅速发展。 [7] 目录 1 历史 1.1 技术积淀（1987-2000） 1.2 出现与兴起（2000-2004） 1.3 唱片市场的颠覆者（2004-2007） 1.4 巅峰和衰落（2005-2013） 1.5 摇摇欲坠的现状与不可预知的明天（2014至今） 2 主要文件格式 2.1 PCM编码格式 2.1.1 WAV 2.1.2 APE 2.1.3 FLAC 2.2 苹果推出的无损文件格式 2.2.1 AIFF 2.2.2 ALAC 2.3 有损压缩格式 2.3.1 MP3 2.3.2 AAC 3 主要市场 3.1 iTunes Store 3.2 Google Play音乐商店 3.3 亚马逊音乐商店 3.4 部分其他音乐商店 4 影响与评价 4.1 对音乐产业的影响 4.2 对科技行业的影响 4.3 正面评价 4.4 负面评价 4.4.1 侵权问题 4.4.2 经营模式不明晰 4.4.3 不适应移动时代 4.5 文化现象 5 延伸阅读 6 参考资料 历史 苹果iTunes+iPod的软硬件搭配让数字音...
                                Read more

                                When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

                                Image
                                2 I don't know why balance of the address is 0. when can this situation? etherscan balances share | improve this question asked yesterday Ru Hi Ru Hi 11 1 New contributor Ru Hi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment  |  ...
                                Read more

                                格利澤436b

                                Image
                                格利泽436b 太陽系外行星 太陽系外行星列表 艺术家笔下的格利泽436b 母恆星 母恆星 Gliese 436 星座 獅子座 赤經 ( α ) 11 h  42 m  11.0941 s [1] 赤緯 ( δ ) +26° 42′ 23.652″ [1] 距離 33.4 ly (10.2 pc) 光譜類型 M2.5 V [1] 軌道參數 半长轴 ( a ) 0.0291±0.0004 [2] AU 軌道離心率 ( e ) 0.150±0.012 [2] 公轉週期 ( P ) 2.643904±0.000005 [3] d (0.00723849 y) 軌道傾角 ( i ) 85.8 +0.21 −0.25 [3] ° 角距 ( θ ) 2.794 mas 近星點時間 ( T 0 ) 2,451,551.716 ±0.01 JD 半振幅 ( K ) 18.68±0.8 m/s 物理性质 质量 ( m ) 22.2±1.0 [2] M ⊕ 半徑 ( r ) 4.327±0.183 [2] [4] R ⊕ 密度 ( ρ ) 1.51 g cm -3 表面重力 ( g ) 1.18 g 溫度 ( T ) 712±36 [2] K 發現 發現時間 2004 發現者 巴特勒、沃格特、 馬西 et al. 發現方法 徑向速度、凌日法 發現地點 美國加利福尼亞州 發表論文 出版 其他名稱 Ross 905 b, GJ 436 b, [5] LTT 13213 b, GCTP 2704.10 b, LHS 310, AC+27:28217 b, Vyssotsky 616 b, HIP 57087 b, GEN# +9.80120068 b, LP 319-75 b, G 121-7 b, LSPM J1142+2642 b, 1RXS J114211.9+264328 b, ASCC 683818 b, G 147-68 b, UCAC2 41198281 b, BP...
                                Read more