Q about electric field between two parallel plates


by asdff529
Tags: electric, field, parallel, plates
asdff529
asdff529 is offline
#1
Feb5-14, 10:50 PM
P: 29
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!
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
A 'quantum leap' in encryption technology
Using antineutrinos to monitor nuclear reactors
Bake your own droplet lens
Shyan
Shyan is offline
#2
Feb5-14, 11:39 PM
Shyan's Avatar
P: 740
Consider Gauss's law [itex] \oint \vec{E}\cdot\hat{n}da=\frac{q}{\varepsilon_0} [/itex].
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 [itex] q=lw\sigma [/itex] 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 [itex] E lw [/itex] and so we have [itex] E=\frac{\sigma}{\varepsilon_0} [/itex].
Now consider [itex] V=-\int_a^b \vec{E}\cdot\vec{dr} [/itex] 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 [itex] E=\frac V d [/itex]. As you saw in the last paragraph,the electric field between the planes was constant along their separation and so the formula [itex] E=\frac V d [/itex] can be used in that case.For example you can have [itex] V=\frac{d\sigma}{\varepsilon_0} [/itex] 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.
asdff529
asdff529 is offline
#3
Feb6-14, 01:59 AM
P: 29
Quote Quote by Shyan View Post
Consider Gauss's law [itex] \oint \vec{E}\cdot\hat{n}da=\frac{q}{\varepsilon_0} [/itex].
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 [itex] q=lw\sigma [/itex] 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 [itex] E lw [/itex] and so we have [itex] E=\frac{\sigma}{\varepsilon_0} [/itex].
Now consider [itex] V=-\int_a^b \vec{E}\cdot\vec{dr} [/itex] 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 [itex] E=Vd [/itex]. As you saw in the last paragraph,the electric field between the planes was constant along their separation and so the formula [itex] E=Vd [/itex] can be used in that case.For example you can have [itex] V=\frac{\sigma}{d\varepsilon_0} [/itex] 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?

Shyan
Shyan is offline
#4
Feb6-14, 02:30 AM
Shyan's Avatar
P: 740

Q about electric field between two parallel plates


Quote Quote by asdff529 View Post
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.
sophiecentaur
sophiecentaur is online now
#5
Feb6-14, 06:42 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,398
Quote Quote by asdff529 View Post
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.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Electric Field in 3 Parallel Plates Introductory Physics Homework 2
Electric Field on two non-parallel plates Classical Physics 2
Electric field between parallel plates Introductory Physics Homework 7
Electric Field: non parallel plates? Introductory Physics Homework 5
Parallel Plates and Electric Field Introductory Physics Homework 1