Dielectric slab in between plates of capacitor

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the arrangement of a dielectric slab between capacitor plates, questioning the assumption that the system can be treated as two capacitors in series. The concern is that the induced charge on the dielectric slab is less than the charge on the capacitor plates, complicating the analysis. A proposed justification involves introducing a hypothetical conducting plate to demonstrate that the voltage and charge relationships remain consistent, allowing for the series capacitor model to hold. The argument emphasizes that the electric field remains unchanged, thus maintaining the capacitance ratio. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of analyzing capacitors with dielectrics and the importance of clarifying assumptions in such configurations.
karanbir
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
i'm reposting this question as nobody answered it previously. please answer it this time.

in given type of arrangement we normally take it equivalent to two capacitors(plate 1 and surface 2) and (surface 2 and plate 3) in series. My question is that a capacitor is formed with two plates of equal and opposite charge but the induced charge on dielectric slab(surface 2) is less than the charge on plates 1 and 3 which is clear by the formula q(ind)=q(1-1/k), then how can we assume plate 1 and surface 2 as one capacitor?
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
making demands on people for answers is not the wisest way to engender help

definately doesn't encourage me to help you :(

Dave
 
Here is one way to justify this method:
Place a hypothetical conducting plate (with infinitesimal thinness) on the other face of the dielectric and you have two capacitors in series now! Since the plate doesn't change the electric field E , the voltage difference between the two REAL plates remains the same. So does charge Q on each plane which depends on the normal component of E. Thus the ratio Q/V=C is also remains the same.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top