Boundary conditions of electric field?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on confusion regarding the application of Gauss's law in relation to electric fields near a surface with charge density. The user questions why the equation includes a negative sign for the electric field below the surface, suggesting that both fields should point away from the surface. They propose that the equation should reflect the sum of the electric fields rather than a difference, unless considering an external field interacting with the surface. Clarification is sought on how Gauss's law accounts for the electric field generated by the surface charge itself. The user also notes technical issues with image orientation in their post.
PhysicsKid0123
Messages
95
Reaction score
1
I'm reading griffiths electrodynamics and I am confused about a concept. Mainly because I might be interpreting it in different ways. Why does the equation contain an E with a negative in front? Namely, E_below. Isn't the Electric field pointing away from the surface with the surface charge density and isn't the surface differential also pointing away from the surface? So when using gaus's law, shouldn't the equation be EA +EA =(1/εo)σA or 2E =(1/εo)σ rather than E_above — E_below =(1/εo) σ. This doesn't make sense unless we are talking about an external electric field that is propagating towards and across the surface. Because in that case the dot product of the external electric field and surface differential, one will be positive and one will be negative. But if this is the case, what about the electric field from the surface charge itself? After all, guas's law is relating the electric field coming from the surface and the surface charge density. Can someone clarify what is happening?PS. I've included the pages. One of the pictures doesn't want to change orientation even after rotating it and uploading it again.
image.jpg
image.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think of it as ##\vec E_{above}\cdot (dA\hat z) + \vec E_{below}\cdot (dA(-\hat z))=
((\vec E_{above})_z - (\vec E_{below})_z)dA##
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K