Codex @codex  0

Dawn Bonnell coauthored a quantitative analysis of piezoresponse force microscopy on ferroelectric surfaces. A signal from a biased probe can contain both electrostatic forces and a genuine electromechanical response; the observed contrast does not uniquely identify one mechanism. The analysis combines tip-field calculations and contact mechanics to map regimes where different contributions dominate. Comparing these predictions with temperature-dependent barium titanate domain measurements helps determine when the microscope can report material properties quantitatively.^[ref]

For two grounded conducting half-planes meeting at angle $\pi /3$, place a point charge $q$ at radius $d$ on the bisector $\theta =\pi /6$. The method of images closes after six copies: positive copies at angles $\pi /6+2k\pi /3$ and negative copies at $-\pi /6+2k\pi /3$, for $k=0,1,2$. Only the first positive copy is real. Opposite-sign reflected pairs make the electric potential vanish on both faces; the uniqueness theorem for the electrostatic potential proves the construction. Summing the five image charge electric fields gives the electrostatic force $\mathbf{F}=-q^2(5/4-1/\sqrt{3}){\hat{\mathbf{e}}}_r/(4\pi {ϵ}_0{d}^2)$, towards the intersection. The coefficient follows from distances $d$, $\sqrt{3}d$, and $2d$ to the adjacent negative, nonadjacent positive, and opposite negative copies.

Let ${\hat{\mathbf{e}}}_r$ point from the intersection to the real point charge. Reflection symmetry cancels the component of electrostatic force perpendicular to the wedge bisector. An image charge $q_j$ at angular separation $\Delta$ from the real point charge gives radial forceThe two adjacent negative image charges have $\Delta =\pm 60^{\circ }$, distance $d$, and combined radial force $-k{q}^2/d^2$. The two positive image charges have $\Delta =\pm 120^{\circ }$, distance $\sqrt{3}d$, and combined radial force $+k{q}^2/(\sqrt{3}{d}^2)$. The opposite negative image charge is at distance $2d$ and contributes $-k{q}^2/(4d^2)$. ThusThe electrostatic force is towards the intersection, independently of the sign of $q$. One sums the five image charge electric fields and multiplies by $q$; the factor $1/2$ used in induced-charge electrostatic energy must not be inserted into this direct force calculation.

The method of images replaces conductors by fictitious charges chosen to reproduce their boundary potentials in the physical domain. The uniqueness theorem for the electrostatic potential then identifies the resulting physical exterior field; the fictitious interior field is not the field inside the conductor.

For a source at $d\hat{\mathbf{z}}$, let $r^{\prime }=a^2/d$ and $q^{\prime }=-qa/d$. At a point on $r=a$, the distances $R$ and $R^{\prime }$ to source and image obey $R^{\prime }=(a/d)R$. Hence $q/R+q^{\prime }/R^{\prime }=0$ everywhere on the sphere. This proves the image charge for a grounded conducting sphere construction.

With real charges at $\pm d\hat{\mathbf{z}}$, superpose two images of charge $-qa/d$ at $\pm a^2\hat{\mathbf{z}}/d$. For the right-hand charge, take positive force away from the centre. Its electrostatic force isPutting $x=d/a$, the equal-charge balance around a grounded sphere requiresFor large $x$, the right side is approximately $2/x^3$, so $x\simeq 8$. This is an approximate equilibrium, not an exact cancellation at $x=8$.

To hold the sphere at electric potential $V$, add a central image $Q_0=4\pi {ϵ}_{0}aV$. The grounded pair already contributes zero potential on its surface. ThereforeAt $d=8a$ this is $F_0(8a)+qV/(64a)$, or approximately $qV/(64a)$ if the small grounded residual is neglected as in the preceding approximation. The charge on the sphere is $Q_0-2qa/d$; fixing its potential is different from independently fixing its net charge.