Explaining Why Total Charge Induced = -q for Image Problem

AI Thread Summary
In the classic image problem involving a conducting plane and a point charge, the induced charge density on the plane integrates to "-q," matching the image charge. This equality arises because the electric field from the point charge and its image cancel at distant points, necessitating that their total effect on the surface charge must be zero. The tangential component of the electric field must vanish on the metal's surface to prevent electron movement, confirming the surface as an equipotential. The concept of image charges serves as a useful tool for solving boundary value problems in electrostatics. Ultimately, while image charges are not physically real, they provide valuable insights into the behavior of electric fields in the presence of conductors.
adityatandon
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Consider the classic image problem with a conducting plane and a point charge. After finding out the charge density on the plane we integrate to find out the total charge induced. It comes out to be "-q",where q is the charge outside-
My book says "It comes out to be -q, as you can convince yourself with the benefit of hindsight". It isn't that obvious why it should come out equal to the image charge. Can somebody explain?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
adityatandon said:
Consider the classic image problem with a conducting plane and a point charge. After finding out the charge density on the plane we integrate to find out the total charge induced. It comes out to be "-q",where q is the charge outside-
My book says "It comes out to be -q, as you can convince yourself with the benefit of hindsight". It isn't that obvious why it should come out equal to the image charge. Can somebody explain?

At distant points the field due to the charge and its image cancel each other out. Now, since in fact the image is not there and the field is indeed caused by the induced charge, the sum of the induced charge and the point charge must be zero otherwise the field at distant points wouldn't be zero.
 
I would describe it a little bit different.
For me, the main point is that the tangential component of the electric field on the plate has to vanish. Otherwise, there would be movement of the electrons at the surface of the metal. So, the metal's surface is an equipotential surface of the electrostatic potential. Now you can think of an imaginary charge distribution that could be found such that the potential vanishes on the surface of the metal if the metal was not there. Of course, you find that it is a symmetrically placed charge -q. You can go even further and generalize this procedure and ask for metallic corners subject to a point charge etc.

The bottom line is that image charges are not real, just something that gives us some intuition about boundary value problems :)
 
Use Gauss's law. If the field is that from q'=-q, then that must also be the total surface charge.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
I passed a motorcycle on the highway going the opposite direction. I know I was doing 125/km/h. I estimated that the frequency of his motor dropped by an entire octave, so that's a doubling of the wavelength. My intuition is telling me that's extremely unlikely. I can't actually calculate how fast he was going with just that information, can I? It seems to me, I have to know the absolute frequency of one of those tones, either shifted up or down or unshifted, yes? I tried to mimic the...
Back
Top