The Electric Field of a Continuous Distribution of Charge

seto6
Messages
248
Reaction score
0
part 2 The Electric Field of a Continuous Distribution of Charge

Homework Statement


find the electric potential at point p
29619jm.jpg

Homework Equations



v=Kq/r...v=Er.

The Attempt at a Solution


2m3gt1d.jpg

using this pic above and dQ=(Q/L)(dX)
v=(K)(dQ)/(L-(X_i)+d) then sub dq=dX(Q/L)

we get...
(KQ/(L))(dX/(L+d-(X_i)) then integrating

V=(KQ/L)((-ln(d))+(ln(L+d)))

is this correct? if not could some one tell me where i went wrong.
thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
That looks about right except that I would combine the logarithm arguments and write it as

V=\frac{kQ}{L}ln \left(1+\frac{L}{d}\right)

Then you can see more clearly what happens when d is much larger than L.
 
i see what you are doing but as d>>L it goes to zero..

but does not tell anything about what's below.

a) an infinitely long wire with total charge Q
b) an infinitely long wire with total charge Qd/L
c) a point charge of magnitude Q
d) an electric dipole with moment QL
 
seto6 said:
i see what you are doing but as d>>L it goes to zero..

Not quite, as d\to\infty V will go to zero. For d\gg L you'll want to use the Taylor series expansion of \ln(1+x) with x=\frac{L}{d} to get an idea of how the potential behaves.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top