Derivation of capacitance for two shells

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the capacitance of a spherical capacitor formed by two concentric conducting shells. The initial formula presented for capacitance is valid for a solid inner sphere and an outer shell, while a different formula applies when considering two shells. Participants clarify that when R is mistakenly treated as the smaller radius, it leads to incorrect results, such as negative capacitance. The correct approach requires ensuring R is greater than r to derive the appropriate capacitance formula. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly identifying the radii to avoid confusion in calculations.
Stendhal
Messages
24
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A spherical capacitor is formed from two concentric, spherical, conducting shells separated by vacuum. The inner sphere has radius r the capacitance is C.

What is the outer radius R?

Already solved the problem, but I'm more wondering on how to derive the equation that I used.

Homework Equations


Capacitance for a solid inner sphere and outer shell is:

$$\frac {4πε} {\frac {1} {R} - \frac {1} {r}}$$

While for two shells at equal radii, the capacitance is:

$$ \frac {4πε*r*R} {R - r}$$

The Attempt at a Solution


The first equation is simple to figure out, but I'm not really sure how and why making the problem into two shells causes that change.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you write ##\frac{1}{R} - \frac{1}{r}## as a single fraction, you will see that the two formulas are the same, except R is the smaller radius in the first formula while R is the larger radius in the second formula.
 
Stendhal said:
While for two shells at equal radii, the capacitance is:
$$ \frac {4πε*r*R} {R - r}$$
Two shells at equal radii? So what are R and r? The capacitance between two shells of "equal radii" would be infinite ...
 
TSny said:
If you write ##\frac{1}{R} - \frac{1}{r}## as a single fraction, you will see that the two formulas are the same, except R is the smaller radius in the first formula while R is the larger radius in the second formula.

I'm still not getting what you're saying there.
rude man said:
Two shells at equal radii? So what are R and r? The capacitance between two shells of "equal radii" would be infinite ...
Whoops, that would change how the question works a lot. My bad, R is suppose to be greater than r.
 
Stendhal said:
I'm still not getting what you're saying there.
Whoops, that would change how the question works a lot. My bad, R is suppose to be greater than r.
If R > r then your first formula in your first post gives negative capacitance so you know that must be wrong!
To correct it, swap r and R. Then you get your second formula! Capiche?
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top