An electron inside a Faraday cage

In summary, the conversation discusses a problem involving the trajectory of an electron released from rest inside a Faraday cage within a uniform gravitational field. The given solution suggests that the Faraday cage shields the gravitational field, but the asker raises the point that if the walls of the Faraday cage are conducting, there should be no electric field inside them. The conversation also mentions a paper that the puzzle is based on, but notes that it is idealized and theoretical. Further discussion delves into the idea of a conductor developing a charged distribution due to electrons sinking in a gravitational field, and the conclusion is reached that this idea may be incorrect.
  • #1
etotheipi
I came across a problem that seemed fairly interesting; it asks what would be the trajectory of an electron released from rest inside a Faraday cage (which is itself within a uniform gravitational field ##\vec{g} = -g\hat{y}##). I didn't quite understand their explanation.

They say that electrons inside the walls of the Faraday cage move freely until they reach equilibrium. We end up with a small net negative charge on the lower side of the Faraday cage and a net positive charge on the upper side, which sets up an electric field inside the walls, pointing downward, of magnitude ##\frac{m_eg}{e}##. They then say that this same homogenous electric field must also exist inside the Faraday cage (otherwise we would have a non-zero line integral of ##\vec{E}## along a path through the wall and the interior), and as a result the electric force on the internal electron exactly balances the gravitational force... so the electron floats (i.e. the Faraday cage effectively "shields the gravitational field").

My problem with that explanation is that if the walls of the Faraday cage are conducting, there should be no electric field inside them (see red part). I wondered if someone could clarify what's going on? Thanks :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Do you have the reference?
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #3
vanhees71 said:
Do you have the reference?

It's question 192 from 200 puzzling physics problems, I'll see if I can upload the answer verbatim :wink:
 
  • #4
Here's the given solution in full:

new doc 2020-07-13 16.25.37_1.jpg

new doc 2020-07-13 16.25.37_2.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #5
etotheipi said:
My problem with that explanation is that if the walls of the Faraday cage are conducting, there should be no electric field inside them (see red part).
I think this assumption ignores gravity and the mass of the electrons.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #6
I think they simply mean within the cavity not within its walls. At least this would make sense and corresponds to what's calculated.

What I didn't understand is the remark about the positron. Here they seem to rather consider a single positron close to a practically infinite conducting half-space. If there'd be a positron within a gas of electrons it would rather quickly get annihilated with an electron leaving two photons ;-).
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #7
That would indeed make more sense, thank you! I also didn't understand what they were trying to get at with the positrons, but the setup is fairly unrealistic anyway, so I thought I'd just roll with it :wink:
 
  • #8
vanhees71 said:
I think they simply mean within the cavity not within its walls.
They explicitly say "in the wall" several times. The electrons in a conductor need to be supported against gravity too, so they sink down until their repulsion balances the gravity on them.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #9
A.T. said:
They explicitly say "in the wall" several times.
That's the way I read it as well. Personally, I have a hard time with a conductor developing a charged distribution because electrons sink to the bottom a bit in a gravitational field. Having expressed my somewhat baseless opinion, I look forward to the discussion.
 
  • #10
Paul Colby said:
Personally, I have a hard time with a conductor developing a charged distribution because electrons sink to the bottom a bit in a gravitational field.
Seems like the puzzle is based on this paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0003491668903011

But as the abstract states, it is very idealized and theoretical:
Whether the necessary assumptions apply to real conductors is not certain.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes Paul Colby and etotheipi
  • #11
I hate paywalls.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn and etotheipi
  • #12
etotheipi said:
there should be no electric field inside them
The electric field within the walls is zero. You may choose, as the author of this problem has, to write this zero as the sum of two contributions with opposite sign: the contribution from the non-uniform distribution of charged particles within the walls, and the contribution from the charged particle inside the cage.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #13
Nugatory said:
The electric field within the walls is zero. You may choose, as the author of this problem has, to write this zero as the sum of two contributions with opposite sign: the contribution from the non-uniform distribution of charged particles within the walls, and the contribution from the charged particle inside the cage.

This sort of makes sense, but the equilibrium condition inside the walls is derived by balancing the weight with the electric field produced by the separation of charges. If the electric field inside is indeed zero (as we would expect), then we would need to assume the charges in the walls have zero mass (as @A.T. alluded to earlier)
 
  • #14
A.T. said:
They explicitly say "in the wall" several times. The electrons in a conductor need to be supported against gravity too, so they sink down until their repulsion balances the gravity on them.
Ok, then I misunderstood the idea.

So you just look at a piece of a conductor in the gravitational field of the Earth. For a static situation then of course there must be a little negative charge density at the bottom of the conductor, because of gravity (the positive lattice is solidly bound and thus is (almost) unaffected by the gravitational field).

At each point in the material the electric force ##\vec{F}_{\text{em}}=\mathrm{d}^3 x E (-e) n \vec{e}_z## due to the built-up charge density must cancel the gravitational force ##\vec{F}_{\text{grav}}=-\mathrm{d}^3 x m g n \vec{e}_z##, i.e.,
$$E=-m/e g.$$
It's now an interesting task to calculate the actual ##n(z)## and ##E(z)## (which I've not done yet).

[EDIT:] I just got the idea that the idea of the book is wrong, because everywhere in the interior of course you must have ##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{E}=\rho##, but ##\vec{E}=\text{const}## and thus ##\rho=-e n + Z e n_{lattice}=0##. So there's only a negative net-surface charge density on the bottom and a positive net-surface charge density on the top, with ##\sigma_{\text{top}}=-\sigma_{\text{bottom}}## as in a capacitor. So (neglecting fringe fields) there's no electric field outside and thus also none in the Faraday cage.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Likes etotheipi

1. What is a Faraday cage?

A Faraday cage is a metallic enclosure that is designed to block electromagnetic fields. It was invented by scientist Michael Faraday in the 19th century.

2. How does a Faraday cage work?

A Faraday cage works by conducting electric charges around the outside of the cage, shielding the interior from any external electric fields. This is known as the Faraday cage effect.

3. Why is an electron inside a Faraday cage significant?

An electron inside a Faraday cage is significant because it demonstrates the effectiveness of the cage in blocking electromagnetic fields. The electron is shielded from any external electric fields and remains unaffected inside the cage.

4. Can any type of Faraday cage block all electromagnetic fields?

No, not all Faraday cages are able to block all electromagnetic fields. The effectiveness of a Faraday cage depends on its design and the strength of the electromagnetic field it is being exposed to.

5. What are some practical applications of Faraday cages?

Faraday cages are commonly used in electronic devices, such as cell phones and laptops, to protect sensitive components from external electromagnetic interference. They are also used in buildings to protect against lightning strikes and in research laboratories to shield equipment from external electromagnetic fields.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
972
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
8
Views
9K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
922
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top