Constant potential inside spherical shell

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of a charge placed inside a spherical shell made of a perfect conductor. The original poster explores the implications of constant electric potential within the shell and its effect on the charge's motion when slightly displaced.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question whether a charge remains stationary due to constant potential and discuss the implications of pushing the charge slightly. They explore the relationship between electric potential, electric field, and force acting on the charge.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants examining the concept of constant potential and its effects on charge motion. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between electric field and potential, but no consensus has been reached on the broader implications of other forces.

Contextual Notes

Participants have acknowledged the absence of other forces, such as gravitational or inertial forces, in their considerations of the problem. There is an emphasis on understanding the implications of constant potential in a simplified context.

physicsjock
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I just wanted to double check if what I am thinking is correct.

Say you have a spherical shell of inner radius R1, and outer radius R2, which is made of a perfect conductor carrying a charge q1.

E=0 inside (r<R1) (and also between R1<r<R2 but not worried about that)

So the potential inside the shell is constant.

Now, say there is another charge centered inside the shell,

Is it correct to think that the charge remains in its position as the potential inside the shell is constant?

So if you were to bump the charge slightly (very slightly so its barely moving) it would simply move in the direction it was pushed at a constant velocity? And this is because the potential is constant within the shell so there is no other force acting on the charge?


Thanks in advance,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
physicsjock said:
Hey,

I just wanted to double check if what I am thinking is correct.

Say you have a spherical shell of inner radius R1, and outer radius R2, which is made of a perfect conductor carrying a charge q1.

E=0 inside (r<R1) (and also between R1<r<R2 but not worried about that)

So the potential inside the shell is constant.

Now, say there is another charge centered inside the shell,

Is it correct to think that the charge remains in its position as the potential inside the shell is constant?

So if you were to bump the charge slightly (very slightly so its barely moving) it would simply move in the direction it was pushed at a constant velocity? And this is because the potential is constant within the shell so there is no other force acting on the charge?
Well, there's no net electric force acting on the charge; but there's no evidence about any other forces that may or may not be acting (gravitational, inertial).
 
Yea fair enough, I didn't mention any other forces.

I was just trying to understand constant potential a little better.

Disregarding any other outside forces, is it correct to say since the potential is constant (no force acting), if the charge inside the spherical shell were pushed it would simply move in the direction it was pushed at a constant velocity (assuming it was only pushed a very small amount)?
 
physicsjock said:
Yea fair enough, I didn't mention any other forces.

I was just trying to understand constant potential a little better.

Disregarding any other outside forces, is it correct to say since the potential is constant (no force acting), if the charge inside the spherical shell were pushed it would simply move in the direction it was pushed at a constant velocity (assuming it was only pushed a very small amount)?
Yes, it is true for "mundane" scenarios (non relativistic velocities).

I'll just point out that a constant potential means a zero electric field, since the field is the gradient of the potential. No field means no force.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
972
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
786
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K