Electric field above one end of a straight line segment?

AI Thread Summary
To find the electric field above one end of a straight line segment with uniform line charge λ, the x and y components of the field were integrated separately. The x component was integrated from 0 to L, while the y component was also calculated, leading to a total field determined by the Pythagorean theorem. The discussion highlighted that while combining components is valid, it may not be necessary, as the x component should approach zero when z is much greater than L. Ultimately, the expected y component in this limit should simplify to kλL/z². The approach taken was generally correct, but the simplification of components could be emphasized.
aftershock
Messages
106
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the electric field a distance z above one end of a straight line segment of length L, which carries a uniform line charge λ. Check that your formula is consistent with what you would expect for the case z>>L

Homework Equations



KQ/r2

The Attempt at a Solution



I first considered the x component of the field and integrated

Kλx*dx/(x2+z2)3/2 from 0 to L

I then considered the y component of the field and integrated

Kλz*dx/(x2+z2)3/2

Finally I used pythagorean theorem on both these terms to find the total field.

The problem became pretty cumbersome (which is why I didn't follow all the calculations through in this post). Is my method correct, or am I way off here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks good to me. So, when you combine the x and y components of the field using the Pythagorean theorem, you are effectively calculating the magnitude of the electric field. I don't think you need to do that, although you certainly can do. I would think it sufficient to say the x and y components separately. The point is that the x component should vanish in the x>>L limit and the y component should become k \lambda L / z^2.
 
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 'Calculation of Tensile Forces in Piston-Type Water-Lifting Devices at Elevated Locations'
Figure 1 Overall Structure Diagram Figure 2: Top view of the piston when it is cylindrical A circular opening is created at a height of 5 meters above the water surface. Inside this opening is a sleeve-type piston with a cross-sectional area of 1 square meter. The piston is pulled to the right at a constant speed. The pulling force is(Figure 2): F = ρshg = 1000 × 1 × 5 × 10 = 50,000 N. Figure 3: Modifying the structure to incorporate a fixed internal piston When I modify the piston...
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