Charge Distribution in Nonconducting Shell System

  • Thread starter Thread starter kilnvzol
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flux
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around calculating the charge distribution in a nonconducting shell system with a central charged particle. The correct charge of the central particle is determined to be 1.77 µC, while the net charges of shell A and shell B are -7.08 µC and 10.62 µC, respectively. Participants emphasized the importance of correctly applying the scale factor (Φs = 6.0 × 10^5 N·m²/C) and avoiding unnecessary subtraction in calculations. The consensus is that understanding the flux behavior around the shells is crucial for accurate results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric flux and Gauss's Law
  • Familiarity with nonconducting materials in electrostatics
  • Knowledge of charge distribution in spherical shells
  • Proficiency in using scientific notation for calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Gauss's Law in electrostatics
  • Learn about electric field calculations for nonconducting materials
  • Explore the concept of electric flux and its implications in different geometries
  • Investigate advanced topics in electrostatics, such as potential energy in charge distributions
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those focusing on electrostatics and charge distribution problems, as well as anyone preparing for exams in these topics.

kilnvzol
Messages
33
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A charged particle is suspended at the center of two concentric spherical shells that are very thin and made of nonconducting material. Figure (a) shows a cross section. Figure (b) gives the net flux Φ through a Gaussian sphere centered on the particle, as a function of the radius r of the sphere. The scale of the vertical axis is set by Φs = 6.0 × 105 N·m2/C. (a) What is the charge of the central particle? What are the net charges of (b) shell A and(c) shell B? (in µC)
http://edugen.wileyplus.com/edugen/courses/crs7165/art/qb/qu/c23/pict_23_12.gif

Homework Equations


EI = q(enc)

The Attempt at a Solution


For part a. I multiplied (2E5)(8.85E-12) = 1.77µC
For part b. I did -(6E5)(8.85E-12)-1.77E-6 = -7.08µC
For part c. I did (6E5)(8.85E-12)+(7.08E-6)-(1.77E-6) = 10.62µC

I don't know what I did wrong. :(
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello kilnvzol, welcome to PF :smile: !

Did you check the scale factor ##\Phi_S## ?
 
My guess is that you got the first part right but not the other two? The first part seems good, but then you go and start subtracting things. You were correct in counting the number of steps the flux increased immediately outside of the point charge, that was good. But then you notice that the flux drops by 6 steps, and every one of those steps is due to the existence of another shell. So all you need to worry about is the 6 downward steps, you don't have to do any subtraction afterwards. And same goes for the third part.

Does that make any sense?
 
BvU said:
Hello kilnvzol, welcome to PF :smile: !

Did you check the scale factor ##\Phi_S## ?

Did I need to multiply (5/6) by (2E5)(8.85E-12)?
Shadrach Hepner said:
My guess is that you got the first part right but not the other two? The first part seems good, but then you go and start subtracting things. You were correct in counting the number of steps the flux increased immediately outside of the point charge, that was good. But then you notice that the flux drops by 6 steps, and every one of those steps is due to the existence of another shell. So all you need to worry about is the 6 downward steps, you don't have to do any subtraction afterwards. And same goes for the third part.

Does that make any sense?

I got the first part wrong too.
So its just (6E5)(8.85E-12) without the subtraction?
 
If five divisions represent ##6 \times 10^5\ ##Nm2/C, how much is two divisions ? And six ? And ten ?
 
BvU said:
If five divisions represent ##6 \times 10^5\ ##Nm2/C, how much is two divisions ? And six ? And ten ?
Oh, I didn't even catch that. Yeah, kilnvzol, that would be your reason for getting the first part wrong.
kilnvzol said:
I got the first part wrong too.
So its just (6E5)(8.85E-12) without the subtraction?
Almost, you would still have to account for the value that is actually assumed by one tick mark. But you're right on removing the subtraction. Does it actually make sense why that is?
 
I got it! I forgot to multiply in the scale. XD

Thanks guys! :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K