Calculating Electric Field at Lead-199 Nucleus with Gauss's Law

  • Thread starter Thread starter physizl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gauss's law Law
physizl
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Determine the magnitude of the electric field at the surface of a lead-199 nucleus, which contains 82 protons and 117 neutrons. Assume the lead nucleus has a volume 199 times that of one proton and consider a proton to be a sphere of radius 1.20 10-15 m.


Homework Equations



E = kQ/r^2
Q = pV
p = Ne = (#protons)(1.6x10^-19)
V = Volume Nucleus = (#lead)(4/3)(pi)(r^2)

The Attempt at a Solution



tried plugging all the numbers in and came out with a wrong answer..

is my method correct?
is there an easier way such as enclosing the atom in a Gaussian sphere?
..making E = sigma/epsilon_naught
what would sigma be in this case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to the forum.

Why do you take Q= pV ?
What did you take for r? In the Electric field?
 
Q = enclosed charge?
p = charge density & V = volume, so the units are just C when you multiply pV

for r, i set whatever the volume is and i set it to equal (4/3)pi(R^3) and solved for R
 
nevermind i figured how to do it!

i used..
E = kQ/(r^2)
Q = (# protons)(elementary charge)
r = [(# lead)^(1/3)](radius proton)

plugged Q and r back in E and came out with the correct answer
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top