- #1

- 24

- 0

The integration is screwing me up, thanks

Kael.

- Thread starter impendingChaos
- Start date

- #1

- 24

- 0

The integration is screwing me up, thanks

Kael.

- #2

- 24

- 0

for part (a) i know

p=Q/4*pi*permittivity of free space*R1^2*L

V(enclosed)=pi*r^2*L

so p*V(enclosed)= the ratio (r^2/R1^2)Q which is the total Q enclosed

- #3

Doc Al

Mentor

- 45,029

- 1,326

- #4

- 24

- 0

(permittivity of free space= Eo)

int(E) x dA = Q(enc)/Eo

EA= (r^2/R1^2)Q/Eo

then dividing both sides by the area would give E?

and if so would I need to use the left side of the equation divided by the area of the face of the cylinder plus the equation divided by the area of the length of the cylinder?

- #5

Doc Al

Mentor

- 45,029

- 1,326

OK.Ok ok I'm starting to see it, so i would have

(permittivity of free space= Eo)

int(E) x dA = Q(enc)/Eo

Almost there. Get rid of Q. You are given charge density, not Q. (As I suggested earlier, express the enclosed charge as charge density times the volume.)EA= (r^2/R1^2)Q/Eo

Express area and volume in terms of r.

- #6

- 24

- 0

charge density = Q/(4pi*L*R1^2)

and the volume is pi*L*r^2

then multiplying the two would give (Q*r^2)/(4*R1^2)

ok, now I take this Q(enc) and put it Gauss to obtain:

EA=(Q*r^2)/(4*R1^2*Eo)

but you said Q is not present?

In any case I continued from this by divinding the right side by A which would give me my electric field. Now, do I need to do this for the ends AND the length of the tube or are the ends considered negligible since it is "very long." I have solved it and obtained the correct answer but only when excluding the ends of this tube such that

E=pr/2Eo (this is the stated result)

So now, assuming the math was correct, is there a reason I should be considering the ends to be zero?

- #7

Doc Al

Mentor

- 45,029

- 1,326

Well, you tell me. If you aren't given Q, how can your answer be in terms of it? You are given the charge density though.but you said Q is not present?

You are presumably finding the field at positions far enough from the ends so that any non-uniformity of field can be neglected. Your Gaussian surface is a cylindrical section in the middle of the long rod.In any case I continued from this by divinding the right side by A which would give me my electric field. Now, do I need to do this for the ends AND the length of the tube or are the ends considered negligible since it is "very long." I have solved it and obtained the correct answer but only when excluding the ends of this tube such that

E=pr/2Eo (this is the stated result)

So now, assuming the math was correct, is there a reason I should be considering the ends to be zero?

When you are finding the electric flux through the Gaussian surface, you are multiplying the area times the component of E perpendicular to that surface. In which case, what would be the flux through the end pieces of that Gaussian cylinder?

- #8

- 24

- 0

Zero! :rofl:

- #9

Doc Al

Mentor

- 45,029

- 1,326

Exactamundo!

- #10

- 24

- 0

Thanks alot, I think I can get parts b through c from here!

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 4K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 585

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 792

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 566

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 6K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 0

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 20

- Views
- 901

- Last Post

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 2K