Electric field (easy at least I thought so)

AI Thread Summary
The electric field strength 5.0 cm from a long charged wire is 2000 N/C, and the question is about the field strength at 10.0 cm. The initial assumption was that the field strength would decrease to 500 N/C by applying the formula E = K*q*(r head)/(r^2), but this was incorrect due to the misapplication of the formula for a line charge. The correct approach involves using Gauss's law, which accounts for the cylindrical symmetry of the electric field around a long charged wire. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the geometry of the charge distribution when calculating electric fields. The confusion highlights the need to apply the appropriate formula for line charges rather than point charges.
Kalie
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
The electric field strength 5.0 cm from a very long charged wire is 2000 N/C.
What is the electric field strength 10.0 cm from the wire?

Okay I thought that since the radius is double what it was before using the equation:

E= K*q*(r head)/(r^2)

I said that it decreases 1/4 and becomes 500.

Thats wrong. But obviously because I ignored r head...the vector thingy. But how do I apply it to the equation and solve for its new value?

Sigh...confused
 
Physics news on Phys.org
think about the symmetry... for a point charge the field is distributed in all direction (a spherical gaussian surface), for a line of charges (the lateral surface of a cylinder)... so in other words, you have used the wrong formula. Use Gauss's law to derive a new a formula (E as a fn of r)
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
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 .
Back
Top