Parallel plate capacitor capcitance question?

AI Thread Summary
Capacitance in a parallel plate capacitor increases with the area of the plates, as described by the formula C=ε₀εᵣ(A/d). However, the electric field (E) decreases as the area increases, since E is inversely proportional to the area when charge (Q) remains constant. The total electric field at a point is weaker when the same amount of charge is spread over a larger area, due to the increased distance from the charges. The charge remains constant unless the potential difference applied changes, which would also affect capacitance and the electric field. Understanding these relationships clarifies how capacitance, electric field, and charge interact in a parallel plate capacitor.
mazinse
Messages
188
Reaction score
2
I know that the capacitance is depended on area and distance etc etc. However, can someone explain to me the statement that as the area increases the, Elctrical field decreases.
C would increase because of the area, and V would decrease because of the E, so for this scenario would the charge be constant or increasing.

Can someone show in equation forms, please show how E would decrease.

maybe a little concept too. This is something I can't understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello mazinse,

The formula to determine the capacity of a parallel plate capacitor (distance of the plates being d) would be:

C=\epsilon_0\epsilon_r*\frac{A}{d}

As you said with increasing area A the capacity increases as well.

Now the formula for the electric field:

E=\frac{U}{d}

U=\frac{Q}{C}=\frac{Q}{\epsilon_0\epsilon_r*\frac{A}{d}}

E=\frac{Q}{\epsilon_0\epsilon_rA}

As the area increases the electic field decreases.

In your scenario only the area is increased, the charge would remain the same.

Regards,

nazzard

Edit: Aaaahhhh, the forum won't stop eating my equations up :blushing:
 
Last edited:
yes it's wonderful using the energy equation, this works out nice. However, why does electrical field decrease, can u give me a conceptual explanation.
 
mazinse said:
yes it's wonderful using the energy equation, this works out nice. However, why does electrical field decrease, can u give me a conceptual explanation.
Notice that all the "U"s in nazzard's post are actually potential differences \Delta V, not the usual energy density U (his notation is not conventional).

To answer your question, the total E field at a point is ismply the vector sum of the E fields produced by all the charges, right? Now imagine uniformly spreading the same amount of charges over a larger area. Then of course the total E field will be weaker (since almost all the charges will be farther away from the point).
 
ok ok that is helpful, but why is charge constant when A goes up, what controls it? If I increase like the current or voltage of the power supply, would the charge change then? But that would change potential difference too then right? And everything would be changed
 
It is the change in potential difference applied that causes the change in charge.
If charge were to increase by m times and area increased by n times the change in the electric fieold would be m/n times the original, as can be seen by using the relation posted by nazzard,
E=\frac{Q}{\epsilon_0\epsilon_rA}
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top