Electric Field due to a line of charge

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field due to a straight line of charge with uniform linear charge density. The derived expression for the electric field in the x-direction shows that as the distance z becomes much larger than the length L of the line charge, the x-component approaches zero, while the z-component behaves like that of a point charge. There is some confusion regarding the behavior of the electric field at large distances, with participants clarifying that the field does not become zero but rather approaches a specific form related to a point charge. Additionally, the electric potential is discussed, with participants noting that its gradient results in an electric field that only has a z-component. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the limits and behavior of electric fields in relation to charge distributions.
stunner5000pt
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
5
Have a look at the diagram

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

SOlution:
\lambda= q/L
dq = \lambda dx

For the electric Field in the horizontal (points to the left and is negative)

dE_{x} = \frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \frac{dq}{(z^2 + x^2)} \sin \theta

Subsituting what we know about sin theta and dq

dE_{x} = \frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \frac{\lambda dx}{(z^2 + x^2)} \frac{x}{\sqrt{z^2 + x^2}}

integrating x = 0 to x = L

E_{x} = \int dE_{x} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \int_{x=0}^{x=L} \frac{xdx}{(z^2+x^2)^{\frac{3}{2}}} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{-1}{\sqrt{z^2 + x^2}} \right]_{x=0}^{x=L} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{-1}{\sqrt{z^2 + L^2}} + \frac{1}{z} \right]

E_{x} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{1}{z} -\frac{1}{\sqrt{z^2 + L^2}} \right]

ok so suppose z >> L then the electric field is zero?? Shouldnt it reduce to that of a point charge and not zero?? this should be regardless of whether i solve for x or z right??

for the Z direction i got
E_{z} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}z} \frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2 + z^2}}
unlike the last one this one does reduce to the equatiopn for a point charge but is off my a factor of 1/z ...

combining the two yields

\vec{E} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{1}{z} -\frac{1}{\sqrt{z^2 + L^2}} \right] \hat{x} + \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}z} \frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2 + z^2}} \hat{z}is there soemthing wrong with the calculationg ofr hte X Horizontal Direction?? Please help

Thank you in advance for your help and advice!
 

Attachments

  • noise.JPG
    noise.JPG
    13.1 KB · Views: 3,718
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
stunner5000pt said:
E_{x} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{1}{z} -\frac{1}{\sqrt{z^2 + L^2}} \right]

ok so suppose z >> L then the electric field is zero?? Shouldnt it reduce to that of a point charge and not zero?? this should be regardless of whether i solve for x or z right??
If you get far enough away, the field from anything (finite) goes to zero! :wink: But you need to understand how it approaches zero. In this case, think about it: You are very far from a point charge--What's the direction of the field?

for the Z direction i got
E_{z} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}z} \frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2 + z^2}}
unlike the last one this one does reduce to the equatiopn for a point charge but is off my a factor of 1/z ...
It's not off. You just need to examine its behavior as z goes to infinity. Use a binomial expansion:
(L^2 + z^2)^{-1/2} \approx (1/z)(1 - \frac{L^2}{2z^2})
 
I'm studying from Griffiths too :) and I've a question about this exercize.

The electric potential:

V = \frac{ \lambda }{4\epsilon_0 \pi} ln\left(\frac{L+\sqrt{z^2+L^2}}{z}\right)


Calculating the electric field from the V's gradient, it has x component always at zero.
Where the problem?

I'm sorry for my poor english, good evening mate!
 
Yeah, Griffith's book is good.

stunner5000pt said:
combining the two yields

\vec{E} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \left[ \frac{1}{z} -\frac{1}{\sqrt{z^2 + L^2}} \right] \hat{x} + \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}z} \frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2 + z^2}} \hat{z}


is there soemthing wrong with the calculationg ofr hte X Horizontal Direction?? Please help

Thank you in advance for your help and advice!

From your calculation for \vec{E} (yes i think it's correct for both direction), for z >> L, the electric field of component - x will disappear (since \frac{1}{z} - \frac{1}{z} = 0) and leaves for us the z - component as below:


after simplifying, \vec{E} = \frac{\lambda L}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}z^2}\hat{z} for z>>L.


the case is the same as above example from griffith's book (that is for E at a distance z above midpoint of line L). I quoted it : From far away the line

"looks" like a point charge q = 2\lambda L.

Peppe said:
I'm studying from Griffiths too :) and I've a question about this exercize.

The electric potential:

V = \frac{ \lambda }{4\epsilon_0 \pi} ln\left(\frac{L+\sqrt{z^2+L^2}}{z}\right)


Calculating the electric field from the V's gradient, it has x component always at zero.
Where the problem?

I think x and y component will be gone since you do grad \nabla-operation to potential (the potential only depend on z). so,

\vec{E} = -\nabla V = -\frac{\lambda}{4\pi \epsilon_{0}}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\ln (\frac{L + \sqrt{z^2 + L^2}}{z}).

suppose k = \sqrt{z^2 + L^2},


it will give \vec{E} = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}}(\frac{z}{k(L + k)} - \frac{1}{z})\hat{z}


btw, i can't find this problem in griffith's book...
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top