Calculating Flux for a Uniform Electric Field at an Angle

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the electric flux through a square surface in a uniform electric field. The electric field is specified as 5.0 kN/C directed along the x-axis, and the square has a side length of 20 cm, with its normal making a 45-degree angle with the x-axis.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Gauss's law and the definition of electric flux, with some emphasizing the need for the dot product in the calculation. Questions arise regarding the nature of the surface and whether it qualifies as a Gaussian surface.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the correct approach to calculating electric flux, with some providing guidance on using the dot product and clarifying the distinction between closed and open surfaces. There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions regarding the surface's classification.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the uniformity of the electric field and the orientation of the surface, with participants noting that integration is unnecessary due to these conditions. The distinction between closed and open surfaces is also a point of contention.

ayestaran1
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
For a uniform electric field the vector E = 5.0 kN/C in the i direction. What is the flux of this field thru a square of side 20 cm if the normal to its plane makes a 45 degree angle with the x axis?

How do I set this up? I thought according to Gauss's law E = q/epsilon naught so r didn't matter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gauss' law only holds for closed Gaussian surfaces.

In this question you need only think about the dot product. Remember [tex]\phi = \int E.dA[/tex]
 
Yes this isn't a closed surface. So you have to use the fundamental mathematical definition of electric flux to do this. No integration is required since the field is uniform and the plane is appropriately oriented.
 
Thanks, so I did E*A_1 = E*A_2cos(theta) since it has to be normal to the surface, and as a result I got (5.0 k N/C) * (.2 m)^2 * cos(45) = 141 N*m^2 /C. Does that look right?

I know this is pretty basic - but how did you know it wasn't a closed surface? I thought squares can be Gaussian surfaces... why isn't it here?
 
Gaussian surfaces are closed surfaces, meaning to say they can enclose some volume. Your square isn't a closed surface.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K