Is the Electric Field of a Charged Disc Correct?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the electric field at a distance 'z' above a uniformly charged disk of radius R. The original poster seeks clarification on their solution and its correctness, particularly in the context of limits as R approaches infinity and when z is much greater than R.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster presents their solution and asks for validation. Participants discuss the implications of taking the limit as R approaches infinity and explore Taylor expansions for the case when z is much greater than R. There are questions about the correctness of terms in the Taylor expansion and the resulting expressions for the electric field.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the original poster's solution, providing corrections and suggestions for further exploration. There is a focus on understanding the implications of different limits and the use of Taylor expansions, with no explicit consensus reached on the final outcomes.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty regarding the Taylor expansion and its application in this context, indicating a potential gap in understanding that may affect the discussion.

Reshma
Messages
749
Reaction score
6
Electric field of Charged disc

Find the electric field at a distance 'z' above a uniformly charged disk of radius R.

I have solved this problem. Can someone just clarify if my solution is right?
I couldn't attach a diagram..sorry!

Solution: Using conventional notations,
[itex]\sigma[/itex] is the charge density on the circular surface. dq is the differential

charge and dA is the differential area.
Dividing the disc into flat concentric rings of thickness dx and considering one such ring

of radius x : [tex]dA = 2\pi xdx[/tex]
Hence [tex]dq = \sigma 2\pi xdx[/tex]
Magnitude of the electric field is given by(perpendicular components cancel each other here):[tex]dE\cos \theta[/tex]
[tex]\cos \theta = \frac{z}{r}[/tex]
[tex]r = \sqrt{z^2 + x^2}[/tex]

[tex]E = \int dE\cos \theta[/tex]

[tex]E = \frac{\sigma z}{4\epsilon_0} \int_{0}^{R} \frac{2x}{(z^2 + x^2)^{3/2}}dx[/tex]

On solving after the necessary substitutions the answer I got is:
[tex]E = \frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_0}[/tex][tex][1 - \frac{z}{\sqrt{z^2 + r^2}}][/tex]

Is my answer correct?
How will my answer modify if [itex]R\rightarrow \infty[/itex]?
Also check the modifications for [itex]z >>R[/itex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
So you found that

[tex]E(z,R)=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_{0}}\left(1-\frac{z}{\sqrt{z^{2}+R^{2}}}\right)[/tex] (1)

(I corrected your typo).

It's perfect.Take [itex]R\rightarrow +\infty[/itex] and then u'll find

[tex]E_{\mbox{charged plane}}=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_{0}}[/tex] (2)

which is exactly the result u'd be getting if u were computing (2) using Gauss' theorem.

Daniel.
 
Reshma said:
Also check the modifaications for [itex]z >>R[/itex]

Try doing a second-order Taylor expansion around R=0. Does the result look familiar?
 
After that,to recover something known,take

[tex]\sigma=\frac{q}{\pi R^{2}}[/tex]

Daniel.
 
Thank you dextercioby for correcting my result :smile:
I understood the first part of my question for [itex]R\rightarrow \infty[/itex]

For the second part, z>>R
Try doing a second-order Taylor expansion around R=0. Does the result look familiar?
[tex]E=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_{0}}[1-\frac{z}{\sqrt{z^2}}][/tex]
Wouldn't this mean E=0?
 
Last edited:
For the second part, z>>R

[tex]E=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_{0}}[(1-\frac{z}{\sqrt{z^2}}][/tex]
Wouldn't this mean E=0?[/QUOTE]

You missed a second-order term here! :smile:
 
I'm sorry, I'm not familiar quite familiar with Taylor Expansion in this context :frown:
Can you help me on this?
 
Reshma said:
I'm sorry, I'm not familiar quite familiar with Taylor Expansion in this context :frown:

For a given z:

[tex]E(R)=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_0}(1-\frac{z}{\sqrt{z^2+R^2}})[/tex]

The Taylor expansion, to second order, is given by:

[tex]E\simeq E(0)+E'(0)R+\frac{1}{2}E''(0)R^2[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Another way,using something (hopefully) familiar

[tex]E (z,R)=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_{0}}\left[1-\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{R}{z}\right)^{2}}}\right][/tex]

To the second order,

[tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{R}{z}\right)^{2}}}\simeq 1-\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{R}{z}\right)^{2}[/tex]

,using the famous (hopefully for you,too)

[tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+x^{2}}}\simeq 1-\frac{1}{2}x^{2}[/tex]

for [itex]x\rightarrow \frac{R}{z} <<1[/itex].

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
SpaceTiger said:
For a given z:

[tex]E(R)=\frac{\sigma}{2\epsilon_0}(1-\frac{z}{\sqrt{z^2+R^2}})[/tex]

The Taylor expansion, to second order, is given by:

[tex]E\simeq E(0)+E'(0)R+\frac{1}{2}E''(0)R^2[/tex]

I evaluated the series using Taylor's formula for R=0. Please let me know if they are correct.
E(0) = 0
[tex]E'(R) = \frac{\sigma z}{2\epsilon_0} (z^2 + R^2)^{-3/2} R[/tex]
Wouldn't this mean E'(0) R = 0 ?

[tex]E"(R) = \frac{\sigma z}{2\epsilon_{0}}[/tex] [tex]-3(z^2 + R^2)^{-5/2} R[/tex]

Meaning (1/2)E"(0)R2 =0 ?

Edit: My codes aren't working? :cry: Can someone look into this?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Dextercioby-- I think your answer is more comprehensive :smile:
 
  • #12
Completing

[tex]f(x)=:\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+x^{2}}}[/tex] (1)

To the third order

[tex]f(x)\simeq f(0)+\frac{1}{1!}\left\frac{df(x)}{dx}\right|_{x=0} x+\frac{1}{2!}\left\frac{d^{2}f(x)}{dx^{2}}\right|_{x=0} x^2[/tex] (2)

One can easily show that

[tex]f(0)=1[/tex] (3)

[tex]\left\frac{df(x)}{dx}\right|_{x=0} =0[/tex] (4)

[tex]\left\frac{d^{2} f(x)}{dx^{2}}\right|_{x=0} =-1[/tex] (5)

Going with (3)-(5) in (2),u find exactly

[tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+x^{2}}}\simeq 1-\frac{1}{2}x^{2}[/tex] (6)

Q.e.d.

Daniel.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
880
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K