Calculating Capacitance of a Capacitor

AI Thread Summary
The capacitance of a capacitor, represented by the equation C=q/V, is fundamentally determined by the geometry of the capacitor's plates and not by the charge (q) or potential difference (V) itself. While one can calculate capacitance using the formula C=q/V when given specific values for charge and voltage, this does not contradict the principle that capacitance is a geometric property. The relationship indicates that for a fixed geometry, a specific charge corresponds to a specific voltage. Therefore, the values of charge and voltage are interdependent based on the capacitor's geometry. This means that the formula remains valid and consistent within the context of an ideal parallel-plate capacitor.
skaterbasist
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I have a question regarding the equation q=CV, where q is the charge and V is the potential difference of a capacitor, and C is the proportionately constant C of the capacitor.

From what I understand, the value of C depends only on the geometry of the plates and NOT on their charge or potential difference. If that's the case, then how can the manipulated equation of C=q/V be valid? If we are given the potential difference and charge of a capacitor, how does one go about calculating the capacitance of a capacitor?

The arrangement of the capacitor is an ideal parallel-plate situation.

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
skaterbasist said:
Hello,

I have a question regarding the equation q=CV, where q is the charge and V is the potential difference of a capacitor, and C is the proportionately constant C of the capacitor.

From what I understand, the value of C depends only on the geometry of the plates and NOT on their charge or potential difference. If that's the case, then how can the manipulated equation of C=q/V be valid? If we are given the potential difference and charge of a capacitor, how does one go about calculating the capacitance of a capacitor?

The arrangement of the capacitor is an ideal parallel-plate situation.

Many thanks!

The capacitance C is determined by the geometry of the capacitor only.

If you set the voltage at some voltage V, then the charge on the capacitor is Q = CV.

If you instead set the charge on the capacitor to Q, then the voltage is V = Q/C.

Given a capacitor C, you cannot independently set V and Q. You can set one or the other, and the value of the capacitance C determines the value of the remaining quantity.
 
Thank you very much.

So, just to be clear, if we were given the potential difference V and charge Q of Capacitor C, then based on that equation we may find C with C=Q/V? Or does that contradict the fact that C is determined by geometry only?
 
skaterbasist said:
Thank you very much.

So, just to be clear, if we were given the potential difference V and charge Q of Capacitor C, then based on that equation we may find C with C=Q/V? Or does that contradict the fact that C is determined by geometry only?

No, all three numbers will be consistent. The only caveat is that the C value is fundamental based on the geometry, so given a geometry, you cannot arbitrarily set V and Q.
 
What you actually do is to put a proof charge q on the conductor and calculate/measure electric fields and voltage differences. You will find out that deltaV is ALWAYS proportional to q, so it cancels out when you calculate 1/C = deltaV/q.
 
For a given potential difference across a given capacitor a unique amount of charge develops. Hence the formula can be used.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top