Approximation of electric field of uniform charged disk

AI Thread Summary
The electric field of a uniformly charged disk at a point on its axis is approximated by E = 2k_eπσ(1 - x/√(x² + R²)), where R is the disk's radius and σ is the surface charge density. When the distance x is much greater than R, the approximation E ≈ k_e(Q/x²) is derived by using a binomial expansion for √(x² + R²). The key to this approximation is recognizing that √(x²/(x² + R²)) can be simplified to 1/√(1 + R²/x²), allowing for further expansion. The mistake in the original approach was treating the approximation too simplistically, leading to an incorrect conclusion of E = 0. Understanding these expansions is crucial for correctly deriving the electric field in this scenario.
yoran
Messages
116
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Homework Statement


The electric field of a uniform charged disk at a point on its axis at a distance x from the disk is given by
E = 2k_e\pi\sigma(1-\frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+R^2}})
where R the radius of the disk and \sigma the surface charge density.
In my notes it says that when x\gg R, that is when the distance x to the disk is much bigger than the radius of the disk, then
E\approx k_e\frac{Q}{x^2}
with the Q the total charge on the disk. How do they come to that result?

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


When x\gg R, then \sqrt{x^2+R^2}\approx\sqrt{x^2}=x. But then I get that E=0, which is not obviously not correct.
I guess the approximation that \sqrt{x^2+R^2}\approx\sqrt{x^2} is wrong. But how is the approximation then?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
yoran said:
When x\gg R, then \sqrt{x^2+R^2}\approx\sqrt{x^2}=x. But then I get that E=0, which is not obviously not correct.
I guess the approximation that \sqrt{x^2+R^2}\approx\sqrt{x^2} is wrong. But how is the approximation then?

Thank you.

Hi yoran! :smile:

Always divide so that you get a "1" at the beginning:

√(x²/(x² + R²)) = 1/√(1 + R²/x²) ≈ 1 - R²/2x². :smile:
 
Also Yoran your mistake was that basically you did a 0th order expansion!

If you are not comfy with binomial expansions, you can always MacLaurin expand the function in R/x. You are still using the same thing though-- expanding in R/x instead of x because you want a variable that is small i.e. much less than one (so you can truncate the expansion and still have it legitimately approximate the original function), which R/x satisfies, while just straight up x is very large.
 
Allright then thanks a lot!
 
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