Calculating Electric Potential and Energy in a System of Spherical Conductors

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating electric potential and energy in a system of spherical conductors using Gauss's Law. Corrections are made to the expressions for electric field, potential difference, and initial energy, emphasizing that energy does not follow a superposition principle when multiple conductors are present. The final charge distribution on conductors after connection is derived, highlighting that no electric field exists between conductors at the same potential. The participants also explore an alternative method to calculate energy differences based on the electric field between the conductors. Overall, the conversation focuses on accurately applying principles of electrostatics to derive meaningful results in the context of spherical conductors.
lorenz0
Messages
151
Reaction score
28
Homework Statement
Three spherical thin and hollow conductors ##C_1, C_2, C_3,## have radii respectively ##R_1, R_2, R_3.## A charge ##q_1## is put on ##C_1,## a charge ##q_2## is put on ##C_2,## and a charge ##q_3## on ##C_3.##
Find: (a) the electric field ##E## at a point ##P## at distance ##d## from ##R_3;## (b) The potential difference ##V_3 -V_1## between the conductors ##C_3## and ##C_1;## (c) Now, the conductors ##C_1## and ##C_2## are joined by a conducting cable. Find the variation in electrostatic energy energy ##\Delta U_e.##
Relevant Equations
##V_3-V_1=\int_{R_3}^{R_1}\vec{E}\cdot d\vec{l},\ U=\frac{1}{2}\int \sigma V da##
(a) Using Gauss's Law ##E_P=\frac{q_1+q_2+q_3}{4\pi\varepsilon_0(R_1+R_2+R_3+d)^2};(b) V_3-V_1=\int_{R_3}^{R_2}\frac{q_1+q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 r^2}dr+\int_{R_2}^{R_1}\frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 r^2}dr=\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_2}\right).##

(c) ##U_i=\frac{1}{8\pi\varepsilon_0} \left(\frac{q_1^2}{R_1}+\frac{q_2^2}{R_2}+\frac{q_3^2}{R_3}\right)## and when ##C_1## and ##C_2## are connected we have that ##q_{1f}+q_{2f}=Q##, where ##Q:=q_1+q_2## and ##V_1=V_2\Leftrightarrow \frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_1}=\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_2}## which together imply that ##q_{1f}=\frac{R_1}{R_1+R_2}Q,\ q_{2f}=\frac{R_2}{R_1+R_2}Q## so ##U_f-U_i=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_1}\left(q_{1f}^2-q_1^2\right)+\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_2}\left(q_{2f}^2-q_2^2\right)##
 

Attachments

  • spherical_shells.png
    spherical_shells.png
    23 KB · Views: 108
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
lorenz0 said:
(a) Using Gauss's Law ##E_P=\frac{q_1+q_2+q_3}{4\pi\varepsilon_0(R_1+R_2+R_3+d)^2}##

You are not expressing the distance from the center of the system to the field point correctly.

lorenz0 said:
(b) ##V_3-V_1=\int_{R_3}^{R_2}\frac{q_1+q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 r^2}dr+\int_{R_2}^{R_1}\frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 r^2}dr=\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_2}\right).##

You have set this up correctly in terms of the integrals, but your result for the evaluation of the integrals is not correct.

lorenz0 said:
(c) ##U_i=\frac{1}{8\pi\varepsilon_0} \left(\frac{q_1^2}{R_1}+\frac{q_2^2}{R_2}+\frac{q_3^2}{R_3}\right)##
This is not the correct expression for the initial energy of the system. Energy does not obey a superposition principle.

##\frac{1}{8\pi\varepsilon_0} \frac{q_1^2}{R_1} ## is the energy associated with conductor ##C_1## if the other conductors are not present. Similarly for the other two conductors. But, when all three conductors are present, the total energy is not the sum of these individual energies.

lorenz0 said:
and when ##C_1## and ##C_2## are connected we have that ##q_{1f}+q_{2f}=Q##, where ##Q:=q_1+q_2## and ##V_1=V_2\Leftrightarrow \frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_1}=\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 R_2}## which together imply that ##q_{1f}=\frac{R_1}{R_1+R_2}Q,\ q_{2f}=\frac{R_2}{R_1+R_2}Q##
When ##C_1## and ##C_2## are connected so that ##V_1=V_2##, can there be any electric field between ##C_1## and ##C_2##? What does this tell you about the final charge on ##C_1##?
 
TSny said:
You are not expressing the distance from the center of the system to the field point correctly.
You have set this up correctly in terms of the integrals, but your result for the evaluation of the integrals is not correct.This is not the correct expression for the initial energy of the system. Energy does not obey a superposition principle.

##\frac{1}{8\pi\varepsilon_0} \frac{q_1^2}{R_1} ## is the energy associated with conductor ##C_1## if the other conductors are not present. Similarly for the other two conductors. But, when all three conductors are present, the total energy is not the sum of these individual energies.When ##C_1## and ##C_2## are connected so that ##V_1=V_2##, can there be any electric field between ##C_1## and ##C_2##? What does this tell you about the final charge on ##C_1##?
Thanks!
For part (a) it should have been ##E_P=\frac{q_1+q_2+q_3}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 (R_3+d)^2}##.
For part (b) it should have been ##V_3-V_1=\frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_1}\right)+\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_2}\right).##

For part (c) since ##C_1## and ##C_2## have the same potential the electric field between them has magnitude 0, so I was thinking that maybe the difference in energy relative to the initial situation is the one that was stored in the electric field between them, which should be ##\frac{\varepsilon_0}{2}\int_{R_1}^{R_2}E^2 dV##. This approach would also have the additional benefit of not having to compute the initial and final energy, but does it make sense?
 
Last edited:
For part (c) I think the problem is asking you to find the electrostatic energy before and after the connection is make and take the difference After - Before. By the way, there is a factor of ##\frac{1}{2}## missing in front of the integral ##\varepsilon_0\int_{R_1}^{R_2}E^2 dV.##
 
lorenz0 said:
For part (a) it should have been ##E_P=\frac{q_1+q_2+q_3}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 (R_3+d)^2}##.
Yes

lorenz0 said:
For part (b) it should have been ##V_3-V_1=\frac{q_1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_1}\right)+\frac{q_2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left(\frac{1}{R_3}-\frac{1}{R_2}\right).##
Yes

lorenz0 said:
For part (c) since ##C_1## and ##C_2## have the same potential the electric field between them has magnitude 0, so I was thinking that maybe the difference in energy relative to the initial situation is the one that was stored in the electric field between them
Sounds good.

lorenz0 said:
, which should be ##\varepsilon_0\int_{R_1}^{R_2}E^2 dV##.
There's a numerical factor missing here. [Edit: @kuruman already noted this.]

lorenz0 said:
This approach would also have the additional benefit of not having to compute the initial and final energy, but does it make sense?
Yes, it does. Good.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top