Derive an expression for the flux through a sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the electric flux through a sphere enclosing three charges using Gauss's law. The total charge within the sphere is zero, as the positive charge of +20 μC is canceled out by the two negative charges of -10 μC each. Consequently, the electric flux through the surface of the sphere is also zero, as per the equation Φ = Q_enc/ε0. Participants express confusion about whether additional calculations are necessary, but it is clarified that the application of Gauss's law suffices in this case. The conversation highlights the simplicity of Gauss's law when the total enclosed charge is zero.
phosgene
Messages
145
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Three charges with values + 20 μC, -10 μC and -10 μC are placed at the corners of a 0.10m square, as shown.

c) Consider a sphere of radius 0.3m which totally encloses all three charges. Using Gauss's law derive an expression for the flux through this surface.

Homework Equations



Electric flux = ƩQ/ε0

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't get it, isn't Gauss's law by itself an expression for finding the electric flux (which I think should be 0)? I think it may have something to do with the non-uniform distribution of charge making Gauss's law by itself inadequate for the calculation, but I really have absolutely no idea what I'm supposed to do.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The beauty of Gauss's law is that it doesn't care about where the charge is, only that you have the right total charge. So yes, you got it right, the flux is 0. If your total charge was not 0, however, the problem would be a bit trickier (trickier in that you'd have to think about what Gaussian surface to use).
 
Mindscrape said:
The beauty of Gauss's law is that it doesn't care about where the charge is, only that you have the right total charge. So yes, you got it right, the flux is 0. If your total charge was not 0, however, the problem would be a bit trickier (trickier in that you'd have to think about what Gaussian surface to use).

Thanks for the reply, but are you sure there's nothing else I need to do? The wording of the question made me think that I had to do more than just calculate a value for the flux.
 
\Phi = \oint \mathbf{E} \cdot d \mathbf{A} = Q_{enc}/\epsilon_0
Though I'm sure it can be done by making holes or something, we don't really want to think about that dot product, and we can just completely ignore evaluating the left hand side of this equation because the right hand side is most definitely 0. I dunno, I guess the question was ill-formed or it was trying to mess with your mind.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top