Solving Gauss Law Problem: Electric Field on Hollow Sphere

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to Gauss's Law and electric fields, specifically concerning a hollow sphere with a given electric field strength and direction. Participants explore the implications of the electric field being directed radially inward and its relationship to charge distribution within the sphere.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of Gauss's Law in determining the net charge within the sphere and question the assumptions regarding charge distribution. There are debates about the nature of the charge (negative) and whether it can be uniformly distributed. Some participants express confusion about the conditions under which uniform charge distribution applies.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various interpretations being explored regarding the charge distribution and the application of Gauss's Law. Some participants suggest that the problem may be more complex than initially perceived, while others attempt to clarify the conditions under which certain conclusions can be drawn.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing debate about the assumptions made regarding the charge distribution on the hollow sphere and whether the charge is located on the surface or within the sphere. Participants note the lack of explicit information about the physical nature of the sphere (conductor vs. dielectric) and its relevance to the problem.

mborn
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Hi, I have this problem in my Physics Book:

The electric field everywhere on the surface of a hollow sphere of radius 0.75m is found to be 890 N/C and points radially toward the center of the sphere,
(a) What is the net charge within the sphere's surface?
(b) What can you tell about the nature of the charge and its distribution inside the sphere?

I have answered the first part, it is 5.56x10^-8 C
but for the second part, I can't follow the answer (I have it). It says it is negative and uniformly distributed. But I know that:

1- Gauss' law says nothing about charge distribution on a surface. My be due to symmetry, but again, Gauss' law says nothing about charge distribuion.
2- There can be no charges on the inner surface, this will lead to an electric field at the center. The electric field lines will be directed to the center.

What is wrong in my understanding?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where does it say in the question that you must only use Gauss' Law to make a statement about the charge ditribution ?

Anyway, saying that the charge distribution is uniform would be incorrect. The right answer should be that :
[tex]\rho (r, \theta , \phi) = \rho _0 f(r) [/itex][/tex]
 
But, it said in Halliday that uniform distribution occurs -only- for the spherical case.
so it is solved if this is to be taken as a rule, Yet, how negative?
 
mborn said:
Yet, how negative?
You are given that the field points inward.
 
yes, it is negative on the upper surface, but I say there should be no charge on the inner surface
 
I think you're making this problem more difficult than it is. There is no charge on the surface of the sphere...we don't even know whether it's a conductor or a dielectric, and such considerations are irrelevant, because it need not even be a physical surface! It's just a Gaussian surface, one at which we are measuring the properties of the local electric field in order to determine some information about the distribution of charge enclosed by said surface. Gauss's law can also used to solve the opposite problem (given some info about the charge enclosed, what can you deduce about the flux of the electric field, and therefore the electric field itself?)

In this case, given the properties of the local electric field (more specifically, the field at all points on the surface of the sphere), what information does Gauss's Law (below) tell us about the charge enclosed?

[tex]\oint{\vec{E} \cdot d\vec{a}} = \frac{Q_{enc}}{\epsilon_0}[/tex]

It gives us two pieces of information:

1. The field is radially inward...an inward field suggests that Qenc is some cluster of negative charge. More rigorously, since [itex]\vec{E} \ \ \text{and} \ \ d\vec{a}[/itex] point in opposite directions, (radially inward and outward, respectively) it follows that [itex]\vec{E} \cdot d\vec{a}[/itex] is negative: The net flux through the surface is negative, therefore so is Qenc.

2. The electric field is radial and its strength is constant at all points on the sphere. Since all of these points are equidistant from the centre, it seems that the magnitude of the electric field, depends only on radius i.e. it is a function of r. What would produce such a nice, radially inward E(r)? A point charge at the centre of the Gaussian sphere certainly would, and IIRC, so would any uniform volume charge distribution centred in the Gaussian sphere.

There are your two answers...that the charge is negative, and that it is distributed uniformly.
 
Thanks all, may be he is talking about an INCLOSED charge, and in this case it is what you all said. But, if this charge is ON the spherical shell, then I have a right to confuse a little! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K