Q about electric field between two parallel plates

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the electric field between two parallel plates, highlighting two expressions: E = σ/ε0 and E = V/d. The first expression indicates that the electric field is constant and independent of the distance d when charge Q is constant. The second expression shows that while E = V/d, the potential V can also vary with d, meaning there is no contradiction between the two formulas. The relationship involves capacitance, where maintaining a constant charge while increasing distance requires work, resulting in an increased voltage, but the electric field remains unchanged.
asdff529
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
There are two expressions of electric field between two parallel plates,say one carries Q and another carries -Q
Then the electric field between them=σ/ε0
But there is another expression that E=V/d where d is their distance of separation
What are the differences between them?And what are the conditions when using either of one?
Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider Gauss's law \oint \vec{E}\cdot\hat{n}da=\frac{q}{\varepsilon_0}.
Now take, as a Gaussian surface, a rectangular cube which includes only part of one of the planes and is far enough from the edges. The charge that it includes is q=lw\sigma where l and w are dimensions of the part of the cube which is parallel to the charged planes.From the symmetry, we know that the electric field is perpendicular to the plane of the cube parallel to the charged planes and is constant all over it and so the surface integral is just E lw and so we have E=\frac{\sigma}{\varepsilon_0}.
Now consider V=-\int_a^b \vec{E}\cdot\vec{dr} which is used for finding the potential difference between points a and b from the electric field.If electric field is constant along the way and isn't changing direction,the integral will be just the product of electric field and path length and we will have E=\frac V d. As you saw in the last paragraph,the electric field between the planes was constant along their separation and so the formula E=\frac V d can be used in that case.For example you can have V=\frac{d\sigma}{\varepsilon_0} for the potential difference between two points between the charged planes with separation d.
Its not that they are two different formulas.They're just in terms of different things.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Shyan said:
Consider Gauss's law \oint \vec{E}\cdot\hat{n}da=\frac{q}{\varepsilon_0}.
Now take, as a Gaussian surface, a rectangular cube which includes only part of one of the planes and is far enough from the edges. The charge that it includes is q=lw\sigma where l and w are dimensions of the part of the cube which is parallel to the charged planes.From the symmetry, we know that the electric field is perpendicular to the plane of the cube parallel to the charged planes and is constant all over it and so the surface integral is just E lw and so we have E=\frac{\sigma}{\varepsilon_0}.
Now consider V=-\int_a^b \vec{E}\cdot\vec{dr} which is used for finding the potential difference between points a and b from the electric field.If electric field is constant along the way and isn't changing direction,the integral will be just the product of electric field and path length and we will have E=Vd. As you saw in the last paragraph,the electric field between the planes was constant along their separation and so the formula E=Vd can be used in that case.For example you can have V=\frac{\sigma}{d\varepsilon_0} for the potential difference between two points between the charged planes with separation d.
Its not that they are two different formulas.They're just in terms of different things.

but my teacher said if we use E=σ/ε0 and Q is kept constant,the electric field is independent of d.
it seems that there is a contradiction,because E=V/d as well,where am i wrong?
 
asdff529 said:
but my teacher said if we use E=σ/ε0 and Q is kept constant,the electric field is independent of d.
it seems that there is a contradiction,because E=V/d as well,where am i wrong?

There is no contradiction. E=V/d doesn't mean E depends on d! Because V can be a function of d as well.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
asdff529 said:
but my teacher said if we use E=σ/ε0 and Q is kept constant,the electric field is independent of d.
it seems that there is a contradiction,because E=V/d as well,where am i wrong?
There is no contradiction. The one expression can be re-arranged into the other.
The quantity in this relationship is Capacitance (C) and Q = CV
You can replace this by σ=c0V
where c0 is the capacitance per unit area.

Keeping Q constant and increasing d will require work, so V will have increased. The Volts per Meter will remain the same. Alternatively, separating the plates will decrease the Capacitance, which implies an increase in V.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top