Application of Gauss's Law to Charged Insulators

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around applying Gauss's Law to a cylindrical shell with a uniform charge distribution. A user attempts to calculate the net charge on the shell and the electric field at a specific radial distance but encounters discrepancies in their results compared to the textbook answer. They initially misapplied the formula for electric flux, confusing charge density concepts. After realizing an error in the value of the permittivity constant used, they corrected their calculations. The final correct answer for the net charge on the shell is +913 nC.
EngineerHead
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A cylindrical shell of radius 7.00 cm and length 240 cm has its charge uniformly distributed on its curved surface. The magnitude of the electric field at a point 19.0 cm ra- dially outward from its axis (measured from the midpoint of the shell) is 36.0 kN/C. Use approximate relationships to find (a) the net charge on the shell and (b) the electric field at a point 4.00 cm from the axis, measured radially outward from the midpoint of the shell.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Could someone please explain to me why this does not work:

Flux = Q/e = E*2pi*r*l

Where I am thinking of Q in terms of an average AREA charge density * the area, and not a line density * a length.
-- Is it because it lacks enough independent equations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you think that doesn't work?
 
Because I am currently getting a different answer than that given by the book - which is:

+913 nC
 
Okay it works... I've been using an incorrect value for e when solving from k - apologies.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top