Solving for Charge Position from Flux and Gaussian Surface

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alem2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confused Flux
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving for the position of a charge using electric flux and Gaussian surfaces. The participant initially confuses the definitions of electric flux, using both \(\Phi = E A\) and \(\Phi = \oint \vec{E} \cdot \vec{da}\). It is clarified that the latter is a generalization applicable to any surface, while the former is limited to flat surfaces perpendicular to the electric field. Additionally, the radius \(r\) in Gauss' law refers to the spherical Gaussian surface, not the distance to the charge itself.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gauss' Law
  • Familiarity with electric flux concepts
  • Knowledge of spherical Gaussian surfaces
  • Basic principles of electric fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and applications of Gauss' Law in electrostatics
  • Learn about different types of Gaussian surfaces and their uses
  • Explore the relationship between electric field strength and charge distribution
  • Investigate advanced topics in electromagnetism, such as Maxwell's equations
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone looking to deepen their understanding of electric fields and charge distributions.

Alem2000
Messages
117
Reaction score
0
I was a bit confused by a homwork problem that I was working on. The problem is that I found the flux of a charge and I know the demsions of the Gaussian surface it is encolsed in. It doesn't seem right intuitively to be able to find the location of the charge from this information...but mathmatically I am thinking I can solve for r.
\Phi=\oint _\mathcal{S} \mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{a} = \frac{q_{enc}}{\epsilon _0}
and since electric field is the flux over the area i can find it by
E=\Phi/A
so shouldn't I be able to find the position fo the charge from
\Phi/A=q/4\pi r^2 \epsilon_0
this is really confusing, do I have the theory wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you have two different definitions for flux:

\Phi = E A

and

\Phi=\oint \vec{E}\cdot \vec{da}

Notice how the second definition is a generalization of the first one. The first equation only applies to flat surfaces which are perpendicular to the field, the second definition works in general.

Also, the r that you pulled out of Gauss' law is the radius of a spherical Gaussian surface (an hence the place you are looking at the field) , not "the distance to the charge".
 
THANK YOU, that makes a lot more sense now!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
617
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K