E&M: Gauss' Law Surface Charge Density

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the inner and outer surface charge densities of a conducting shell surrounding a charged rod. Initially, confusion arose from using a spherical Gaussian surface instead of a cylindrical one, which is more appropriate for long wires. After clarification, it was established that the inner surface charge of the shell equals the negative charge of the rod, ensuring zero electric flux inside the conductor. The charge densities were derived using the formulas for surface charge density, incorporating the linear charge density of the rod. Ultimately, the outer surface charge density was found to be equal to the inner surface charge density, maintaining the shell's net charge at zero.
Wmdajt
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A charge of uniform linear density 2.8nC/m is distributed along a long, thin, nonconducting rod. The rod is coaxial with a long conducting cylindrical shell (inner radius =4.8 cm, outer radius =9.40 cm). The net charge on the shell is zero. (a) What is the magnitude of the electric field 14.2 cm from the axis of the shell? What is the surface charge density on the (b) inner and (c) the outer surface of the shell?
Relevant Equations
E=λ/(2πε0r)
ε0ϕ = q
In this question I need to find the inner and outer charge density of the shell I did part A just fine, I used the formula for an electric field due to a line charge, but parts B and C is what's really confusing me. I'm not really sure how to go about it, I placed a spherical gaussian surface inside of the shell which gives me a flux of E*π*r^2. I didn't have a reason to attempt this, I was just seeing where it would take me. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!

Capture.PNG
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wmdajt said:
Homework Statement: A charge of uniform linear density 2.8nC/m is distributed along a long, thin, nonconducting rod. The rod is coaxial with a long conducting cylindrical shell (inner radius =4.8 cm, outer radius =9.40 cm). The net charge on the shell is zero. (a) What is the magnitude of the electric field 14.2 cm from the axis of the shell? What is the surface charge density on the (b) inner and (c) the outer surface of the shell?
Relevant Equations: E=λ/(2πε0r)
ε0ϕ = q

In this question I need to find the inner and outer charge density of the shell I did part A just fine, I used the formula for an electric field due to a line charge, but parts B and C is what's really confusing me. I'm not really sure how to go about it, I placed a spherical gaussian surface inside of the shell which gives me a flux of E*π*r^2. I didn't have a reason to attempt this, I was just seeing where it would take me. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
What formula did you use? Please show your work and explain how you got E*π*r^2. A spherical Gaussian surface is not appropriate for a long wire. Do you see why?
 
kuruman said:
What formula did you use? Please show your work and explain how you got E*π*r^2. A spherical Gaussian surface is not appropriate for a long wire. Do you see why?
I just figured it out! I understand why a spherical Gaussian surface isn't appropriate, the way I drew my diagram was confusing me. I should've used a cylindrical surface. Negative charge is attracted to the inner wall of the shell equal to the amount of charge on the rod. From there I found the charge on the rod and divided it with the inner surface of the cylinder.
 
Wmdajt said:
From there I found the charge on the rod and divided it with the inner surface of the cylinder.
I don't understand this part. You are given the linear charge density on the rod. You do not explain how you found the charge density on the outer surface of the cylinder.
 
kuruman said:
I don't understand this part. You are given the linear charge density on the rod. You do not explain how you found the charge density on the outer surface of the cylinder.
Sorry, I wrote that in a bit of a hurry! I'll clarify.
The charge on the inner surface of the shell is the same as the opposite charge of the rod because the flux inside of a conductor must be zero.

qi = -q, Where qi is the charge of the inner shell surface and q is the charge of the rod

Charge density is defined as follows:
σ = qi/A
Charge is only on the surface of the shell due to it being a conductor, so we use the surface area of the body of a cylinder
σ = -q/(2πrh)

We clarified the outer shell charge is the same as the rod, we can find the charge using linear charge density
q = λh

Putting it all together in the equation above yields charge density of the outer surface of the shell
σ = -λ/(2πr)

The same formula is used for part C because the net charge in the shell is 0, so:
qo = qi = q, where qo is charge of the outer shell
 
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 .
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top