1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Conductor completely surrounds another conductor

  1. Dec 6, 2015 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    "Demonstrate that the capacitance of a conductor is always smaller than or equal to that of a conductor which completely surrounds it."

    2. Relevant equations/3. The attempt at a solution


    Solving this problem for concentric spherical conductors is easy enough, but I am unable to see how one should solve for irregularly shaped conductors. Can anyone offer advice?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 6, 2015 #2

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The problem seems underdefined so far. Is there any more to the full problem statement? Is there a figure that goes with the problem?

    What does it mean "capacitance of a conductor"? Capacitance to what? You need two things to define a capacitance, no?
     
  4. Dec 7, 2015 #3

    vela

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Education Advisor

    The problem is referring to self-capacitance of a conductor. You can think of it as the capacitance of the conductor and a conductor at infinity.
     
  5. Dec 7, 2015 #4

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Thanks vela. I thought that might be it, but I wasn't sure. That makes the problem pretty easy, though, doesn't it? It would be a lot harder (and maybe not even true) if it were the capacitance to a nearby metal object...
     
  6. Dec 7, 2015 #5
    Can you please explain how the answer is easy to see?
     
  7. Dec 7, 2015 #6

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    You skipped listing the Relevant Equation(s)...
     
  8. Dec 7, 2015 #7
    The equations should just be:

    - Gauss' law
    - Surface of conductor is an equipotential, V_0
    - Electric field is normal to surface conductor
    - Electric field is 4*pi*sigma in CGS (sigma is charge density)
    - sigma = Q/Surface Area
    - Capacitance = Q/V_0

    Is there anything Anything else that might be useful?
     
  9. Dec 7, 2015 #8

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Please write out the equations. Just listing their names does not help you set up the equations to solve this question...
     
  10. Dec 7, 2015 #9

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    BTW, please check your PMs. You need to show some effort in this schoolwork thread of yours or it will be locked.
     
  11. Dec 7, 2015 #10
    Is it possible for me to still edit the thread? O don't see that option.
     
  12. Dec 7, 2015 #11

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    No need to edit anything Just post the Relevant Equations and your Attempt at the Solution...
     
  13. Dec 8, 2015 #12

    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    "Demonstrate that the capacitance of a conductor is always smaller than or equal to that of a conductor which completely surrounds it."

    2. Relevant equations


    - Gauss' law
    ## \int_S E \cdot d\vec{s} = \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0}##

    - Surface of conductor is an equipotential: ##\varphi_1##

    - Electric field is normal to surface conductor

    - Electric field at the surface of a conductor is:
    ##E_{surface} = \frac{\sigma}{4\pi \epsilon_0}##

    - ##\sigma = \frac{Q}{A_{surface}}##

    - Capacitance:##C = \frac{Q}{\varphi_0}##



    3. The attempt at a solution

    We are trying to solve for the self-capacitance of the capacitors and show that the larger conductor has a larger self-capacitance than the smaller one. In order to compare the two conductors we can assume that either the conductors have equal charges distributed over them, or that they have equal potentials. Since C = Q/V, if we assume the former then we need to show that the larger conductor has a lower potential, and if we assume the latter, then we need to show that the larger conductor has a smaller charge.

    Let's consider each conductor separately. In general, the potential at any point, ##\vec{r}##, is
    [tex] \varphi(\vec{r}) = \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{\rho(\vec{r})}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV' [/tex]

    If we assume that the conductors have the same charge, then we can solve the above for both of them as:

    [tex] \varphi_{in}(\vec{r}) = \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{\sigma_{in} \delta^3(g_{in}(\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV' [/tex]

    [tex] \varphi_{out}(\vec{r}) = \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{\sigma_{out} \delta^3(g_{out}(\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV' [/tex]

    where ##g_{in}(\vec{r}')## and ##g_{out}(\vec{r}')## represent the surfaces on which the charge distributions are distributed.

    Then

    [tex] \varphi_{in}(\vec{r}) - \varphi_{out}(\vec{r})=\int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{\sigma_{in} \delta^3(g_{in}(\vec{r}')) - \sigma_{out} \delta^3(g_{out}(\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|} dV' [/tex]

    This seems to be getting out of hand though, but at least surely ##\sigma_{in} > \sigma_{out}##, so if I could show that either the remaining part of the integrand is equal to 1, or that:

    [tex] \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{ \delta^3(g_{in}(\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV' > \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{ \delta^3(g_{out}(\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV' [/tex]

    then I'm done, but showing even this seems intractable.

    Ok so what if they have the same potential? I haven't thought about this too much, but I think one can approach this using Gauss' law as:

    [tex] \frac{Q{in}}{\epsilon_0} = \int_{S} \vec{E} \cdot d\vec{s}= -\int_{S} \nabla \varphi \cdot \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|} ds\\
    -\int_{S} \nabla \varphi \cdot \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|}ds = -\int_{S} \frac{1}{|\nabla f|}\nabla \cdot (\varphi \nabla f)ds + \int_{S}\frac{1}{|\nabla f|}\varphi \nabla^2fds \\= -\int_{S} \frac{1}{|\nabla f|}\nabla \cdot (\varphi \nabla f)ds - \varphi_0\int_{S}\frac{1}{|\nabla f|} \nabla^2fds [/tex]

    Thus

    [tex] \frac{Q{in}}{\epsilon_0} = -\int_{S_{in}} \frac{1}{|\nabla f|}\nabla \cdot (\varphi \nabla f)ds + \varphi_0\int_{S_{in}}\frac{1}{|\nabla f|} \nabla^2fds [/tex]

    and for the outer conductor it follows similarly that

    [tex] \frac{Q{out}}{\epsilon_0} = -\int_{S_{out}} \frac{1}{|\nabla g|}\nabla \cdot (\varphi \nabla g) ds + \varphi_0\int_{S_{out}}\frac{1}{|\nabla g|} \nabla^2g ds [/tex]

    where ##f## and ##g## represent the inner and outer surfaces respectively; note the have that ##\varphi_{in} = \varphi_{out} = \varphi_0## has been used. I don't know how to proceed with this solution either.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Conductor completely surrounds another conductor
  1. Spherical conductor (Replies: 7)

  2. Super conductors (Replies: 0)

  3. Spherical conductors (Replies: 3)

  4. Spherical conductors (Replies: 2)

Loading...