Conductor completely surrounds another conductor

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loonuh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conductor
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves demonstrating that the capacitance of a conductor is always smaller than or equal to that of a conductor which completely surrounds it. The discussion centers around the concept of self-capacitance and its implications for conductors of various shapes, particularly focusing on concentric spherical conductors versus irregularly shaped conductors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of capacitance in the context of the problem, questioning what is meant by "capacitance of a conductor" and to what it is referenced. There is an exploration of the implications of self-capacitance and the assumptions regarding charge distribution and potential differences between conductors.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants seeking clarification on the problem statement and the relevant equations. Some have provided equations related to Gauss' law and electric fields, while others express uncertainty about how to approach the solution, indicating a lack of consensus on the next steps.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may be underdefined, questioning the completeness of the problem statement and whether additional information or figures are needed to proceed effectively.

Loonuh
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


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

2. Homework 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?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Loonuh said:

Homework Statement


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

2. Homework 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?
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?
 
berkeman said:
What does it mean "capacitance of a conductor"? Capacitance to what? You need two things to define a capacitance, no?
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.
 
vela said:
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.
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...
 
Can you please explain how the answer is easy to see?
 
Loonuh said:
Can you please explain how the answer is easy to see?
Loonuh said:
2. Homework Equations /3. The Attempt at a Solution
You skipped listing the Relevant Equation(s)...
 
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?
 
Loonuh said:
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?
Please write out the equations. Just listing their names does not help you set up the equations to solve this question...
 
BTW, please check your PMs. You need to show some effort in this schoolwork thread of yours or it will be locked.
 
  • #10
Is it possible for me to still edit the thread? O don't see that option.
 
  • #11
Loonuh said:
Is it possible for me to still edit the thread? O don't see that option.
No need to edit anything Just post the Relevant Equations and your Attempt at the Solution...
 
  • #12

1. Homework Statement

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

2. Homework 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
\varphi(\vec{r}) = \int^{\infty}_\vec{r} \frac{\rho(\vec{r})}{|\vec{r} - \vec{r}'|}dV'

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

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

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

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

Then

\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'

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:

\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'

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:

\frac{Q{in}}{\epsilon_0} = \int_{S} \vec{E} \cdot d\vec{s}= -\int_{S} \nabla \varphi \cdot \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|} ds\\<br /> -\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

Thus

\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

and for the outer conductor it follows similarly that

\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

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
13K
Replies
1
Views
3K