2

I am trying to understand the formula

\begin{equation} \nabla^2\left(\frac{1}{|{\bf r}-{\bf r}'|}\right) = - 4 \pi \delta(\bf{r}-\bf{r}'), \qquad\qquad {\rm (I)} \end{equation}

where ${\bf r}=(x,y,z)$. This is something heavily used in electrostatics and the steps to 'show' this is often the following:

The first derivative reads \begin{equation} \nabla \frac{1}{| {\bf r} - {\bf r}' |} = - \frac{ {\bf r} - {\bf r}'}{| {\bf r} - {\bf r}'|^3} \end{equation} And taking the second derivative gives zero, except for the singularity at ${\bf r} = {\bf r'}$. Then from the divergence theorem we have \begin{equation} \int dV \, \nabla^2 \frac{1}{| {\bf r} - {\bf r'}|} = \int dS \,\,{\bf n} \cdot ( \nabla\frac{1}{|{\bf r} - {\bf r}'|}) = -4 \pi \end{equation} where the integration is performed over a sphere centered at ${\bf r}'$.

Q1: Is there a more direct proof for equation (I)?

Then my main question is about the separate second-order differentials. For instance, we can obtain, by direct computation

\begin{equation} \partial_x^2 \, \frac{1}{| {\bf r} - {\bf r}'|} = \frac{ 3 (x-x')^2 }{| {\bf r} - {\bf r'} |^5} - \frac{1}{| {\bf r} - {\bf r}'|^3} \end{equation}

Q2: Should there be a $\delta$ function on the r.h.s of this equation?

Noa Even
  • 2,801
Saïd M
  • 406
  • 3
  • 13
  • I vote positively also because the question is very interesting. Have you read the book Introduction to Electrodynamics - David J. Griffiths or Introduction to Quantum Mechanics? – Sebastiano Jul 30 '20 at 11:36
  • 1
    @Sebastiano Thank you. Yes, indeed, and also Jackson's (but a while ago). Although the steps are rather straightforward, this has always been a mysterious equation for me... – Saïd M Jul 30 '20 at 11:41
  • I have forgotten the title...I have read the Jackson......but in Italian language...For my humble opinion the book Jackson it is very hard to understand..My suggest it is to see the appendices of the book Introduction to Electrodynamics - David J. Griffiths. I think that there are some explanations. – Sebastiano Jul 30 '20 at 11:44
  • Do you know how distributions are defined? – md2perpe Jul 30 '20 at 12:15
  • @md2perpe I'm not much familiar with the distribution theory in general. In physics, these are either defined through the fact that their values are zero everywhere except at some singular points + their finite integrals, or through taking the limit of some other functions (like Gaussians) – Saïd M Jul 30 '20 at 12:20
  • This Answer, which I posted in June 2015, addresses the first question. – Mark Viola Sep 12 '20 at 15:39

2 Answers2

2

So, first, in the classical sense, this function is not derivable at $x=0$. For $x≠0$, the classical calculus tells you that $$ \Delta (\tfrac{1}{|x|}) = 0 $$

To understand why the Dirac delta appears, one has to get a new notion of derivatives allowing to retrieve information about what is happening at $x=0$. This is called the theory of distribution. In the sense of distributions, $$ \Delta (\tfrac{1}{|x|}) = -4π\, \delta_0 $$ A way to prove it is to come back to the definition of derivative in the sense of distributions $$ \begin{align*} \langle \Delta (\tfrac{1}{|x|}),\varphi\rangle &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \tfrac{\Delta \varphi(x)}{|x|}\,\mathrm{d}x = -\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \tfrac{x\cdot\nabla \varphi(x)}{|x|^3}\,\mathrm{d}x \\ &= -\int_{|x|<1} \tfrac{x\cdot\nabla (\varphi(x)-\varphi(0))}{|x|^3}\,\mathrm{d}x -\int_{|x|>1} \tfrac{x\cdot\nabla \varphi(x)}{|x|^3}\,\mathrm{d}x \end{align*} $$ On the two last integrals, we can integrate by parts one more time, and find $-4π\, \varphi(0)$. Similar computations gives you the Hessian $\nabla^2$ (warning, here I am using the mathematical notation, $\nabla^2 = \nabla\nabla$ and $\Delta = \nabla\cdot\nabla$) $$ \nabla^2 (\tfrac{1}{|x|}) = \mathrm{pv.}\left(\frac{3\,x\otimes x - |x|^2\,\mathrm{Id}}{|x|^5}\right) - \frac{4π}{3}\, \delta_0 \,\mathrm{Id} $$

LL 3.14
  • 12,457
  • I approved but it is more complicated: what is $\delta_0$ and why $\Delta(1/|x|) = -4π, \delta_0$? I have not understood the last formula. – Sebastiano Jul 30 '20 at 12:35
  • Thank you for your answer. I am not much familiar with distribution theory, but managed to partially understand this. I have two questions: the first equatlity you write for $\langle \Delta(1/|x|), \phi \rangle$, is that the definition? I am confused why inside the first integral, $\Delta$ is acting on $\phi$ with no minus sign (from integration by parts, for example). Then why those last two integrals do not seem to add up to the previous line? – Saïd M Jul 30 '20 at 12:45
  • 1
    @SaMaSo, Some basic distribution theory is assumed in this computation. For instance, $\langle T,\phi \rangle$ denotes the paring of the distribution $T$ and the test function $\phi$, and in particular, if $T$ is induced from an ordinary (locally integrable) function $f$, then this reduces to the integral $\int f\phi$. Also, the next step is the result of two-fold integration by parts, which flips the sign twice. – Sangchul Lee Jul 30 '20 at 12:48
  • $\delta_0$ is the Dirac delta centered at $0$. In the last formula, pv. is the principal value. For $x\neq 0$, this is just the same as the function inside. It indicates that when you multiply it by a test function and integrate, you have to take the limit of the integral $\int_{|x|>\varepsilon}$ for epsilon going to $0$. – LL 3.14 Jul 30 '20 at 12:49
  • And Id is just the identity matrix (since the Hessian is a matrix) – LL 3.14 Jul 30 '20 at 12:55
  • Is your last expression missing a minus sign on the first term on the right-hand side? – Mark Viola Sep 18 '20 at 15:46
  • Also, just for a reference THIS ANSWER, which I posted in June 2015, answered the first part of the OP's questions. – Mark Viola Sep 18 '20 at 16:00
  • Yes right, it is easy to check by computing the Hessian pointwise for $x≠ 0$. And you already mentioned your ANSWER as a comment of the answer of Sangchul Lee above, perhaps it is not useful to write it everywhere ... Anyway, this is done properly in a lot of textbooks ... – LL 3.14 Sep 18 '20 at 16:05
2

A1. If you are not familiar with distribution theory, we might consider an alternative approach using the idea of approximate Dirac delta function. Indeed, define

$$ f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2+\epsilon^2}}. $$

Then its Laplacian is

$$ \Delta f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) = -\frac{3\epsilon^2}{(x^2+y^2+z^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}}. $$

So, if $\varphi$ is any compactly supported smooth function on $\mathbb{R}^3$, then

\begin{align*} \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \varphi(\mathbf{x}) \Delta f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} &= - \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \varphi(\mathbf{x}) \frac{3\epsilon^2}{(x^2+y^2+z^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} \\ &= - \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{\mathbb{S}^2} \varphi(r\omega) \frac{3\epsilon^2 r^2}{(r^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}}\, \sigma(\mathrm{d}\omega)\mathrm{d}r \tag{$\mathbf{x}=r\omega$} \\ &= - \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{\mathbb{S}^2} \varphi(\epsilon s \omega) \frac{3s^2}{(s^2+1)^{5/2}}\, \sigma(\mathrm{d}\omega)\mathrm{d}s, \tag{$r=\epsilon s$} \end{align*}

where $\mathbb{S}^2$ is the unit sphere centered at the origin and $\sigma$ is the surface measure of $\mathbb{S}^2$. (If this sounds a bit abstract, just think of the spherical coordinates change!) Now letting $\epsilon \to 0^+$, the dominated convergence theorem tells that switching the order of limit and integration is valid in this case, hence the integral converges to

\begin{align*} \lim_{\epsilon \to 0^+} \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \varphi(\mathbf{x}) \Delta f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} = - \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{\mathbb{S}^2} \varphi(0) \frac{3s^2}{(s^2+1)^{5/2}}\, \sigma(\mathrm{d}\omega)\mathrm{d}s = - 4\pi \varphi(0). \end{align*}

Here, we utilized $\int_{\mathbb{S}^2} \sigma(\mathrm{d}\omega) = 4\pi$ and $\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{3s^2}{(s^2+1)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}s = 1$.


A2. Still using the above setting, we have

\begin{align*} \partial^2_x f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) = \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2-\epsilon^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} = \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} + \frac{1}{3}\Delta f_{\epsilon}(\mathbf{x}) \end{align*}

So it suffices to analyze the contribution of the first term in the last line. To this end, note that if $B_r$ denotes the ball of radius $r$ centered at the origin, then

$$ \int_{B_r} \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} = 0 $$

by the symmetry, and so, we may write

\begin{align*} &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \varphi(\mathbf{x}) \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} \\ &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \left( \varphi(\mathbf{x}) - \varphi(0)\mathbf{1}_{B_r}(\mathbf{x}) \right) \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} \end{align*}

Introducing the regularizing term $- \varphi(0)\mathbf{1}_{B_r}(\mathbf{x})$ makes the integrand decay fast enough, i.e.,

$$ \left( \varphi(\mathbf{x}) - \varphi(0)\mathbf{1}_{B_r}(\mathbf{x}) \right) (2x^2-y^2-z^2) = \mathcal{O}(\|\mathbf{x}\|^3) $$

as $\|\mathbf{x}\| \to 0$, and so, we can utilize the dominated convergence theorem to conclude that

\begin{align*} &\lim_{\epsilon \to 0^+} \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \varphi(\mathbf{x}) \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{(\|\mathbf{x}\|^2+\epsilon^2)^{5/2}} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x} \\ &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \left( \varphi(\mathbf{x}) - \varphi(0)\mathbf{1}_{B_r}(\mathbf{x}) \right) \frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{\|\mathbf{x}\|^5} \, \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x}. \end{align*}

This defines a distribution on $\mathbb{R}^3$ which we may write

$$ \operatorname{p.v.}\left(\frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{\|\mathbf{x}\|^5}\right) $$

by analogy with the Cauchy principal value in the one-dimensional setting. In conclusion, we get

$$ \partial_x^2 \frac{1}{\|\mathbf{x}\|} = \operatorname{p.v.}\left(\frac{2x^2-y^2-z^2}{\|\mathbf{x}\|^5}\right) - \frac{4\pi}{3}\delta(\mathbf{x}). $$

Sangchul Lee
  • 167,468
  • This is more clear +1. Do you use a norm in $\Bbb R^3$? I have not understood the 2nd step of the formula where there is $\varphi(r\omega)$. Do you use spherical coordinates? – Sebastiano Jul 30 '20 at 12:41
  • 1
    @Sebastiano, It is indeed spherical coordinates change. If you parametrize the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^2$ using $$\omega=(\sin\phi\cos\theta,\sin\phi\sin\theta,\sin\phi),$$ then $$\sigma(\mathrm{d}\omega)=\sin\phi,\mathrm{d}\phi\mathrm{d}\theta,$$ and so we recover the ordinary change of variable formula. – Sangchul Lee Jul 30 '20 at 12:43
  • Yes, I studied a bit of classical electrodynamics . I will use $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ in bold math. :-) – Sebastiano Jul 30 '20 at 12:46
  • 1
    This is quite clear, thank you. What about my Q2? Can we use the same procedure for that too? – Saïd M Jul 30 '20 at 12:47
  • @SaMaSo, Now my answer should look good. To put simple, we indeed have a Dirac delta term in each of the second partial derivatives of $1/|\mathbf{x}|$. – Sangchul Lee Jul 30 '20 at 13:58
  • @SangchulLee thanks so much! I‌ have a couple of questions: 1) what symmetry are you considering when you write $\int_{B_r} ... = 0$? 2) what is meant by $\mathbf{1}_{B_r}$? – Saïd M Jul 30 '20 at 14:34
  • @SaMaSo, The unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^2$, i.e., $x^2+y^2+z^2=1$, remains invariant under the permutation of coordinates, for instance, $(x,y,z)\mapsto(y,z,x)$, and this map has unit Jacobian. From this symmetry, it is immediate that $$\int_{\mathbb{S}^2}x^2,\sigma(\mathrm{d}\mathbf{x})=\int_{\mathbb{S}^2}y^2,\sigma(\mathrm{d}\mathbf{x})=\int_{\mathbb{S}^2}z^2,\sigma(\mathrm{d}\mathbf{x}).$$ Also, $\mathbf{1}_A$ is the indicator function notation defined by $$\mathbf{1}_A(x)=\begin{cases}1,&\text{if }x\in A\0,&\text{if }x\notin A\end{cases}.$$ – Sangchul Lee Jul 30 '20 at 20:47
  • Hi Sangchul. This Answer, which I posted in June 2015, addresses the first question similarly, but does not appeal to the DCT. – Mark Viola Sep 12 '20 at 15:40