Electric field inside a parallel plate capacitor

AI Thread Summary
In a parallel plate capacitor, the electric field between the plates is constant due to the opposing charges on each plate. Using a Gaussian "pillbox" inside the plates that encloses zero charge leads to the conclusion that the flux is zero, which can be confusing. However, this does not imply that the electric field inside the pillbox is zero; it simply indicates that there is no contribution to the field from within that specific surface. Unlike a charged spherical shell, where the field inside is zero due to the absence of charge, the electric field between the plates remains non-zero despite the enclosed charge being zero. Understanding this distinction clarifies the behavior of electric fields in different configurations.
beardo34
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Ok I took E&M about 3 years ago and decided I needed to review it. I'm up to gauss' law and am getting confused about one thing. If you have two infinitely long oppositely charged plates, solving for the total e field inside is done by making two gaussian surfaces that enclose each plate. Doing this gives the e field to be a constant between the plates.

My question is, why can't I make a gaussian "pillbox" inside the plates and enclosing zero charge and conclude that the flux through that surface is zero since the field goes in one side and leaves through the other? Obviously I'm making a mistake here somewhere because the field in between the plates is NOT zero but I can't figure out what the mistake is.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
beardo34 said:
Ok I took E&M about 3 years ago and decided I needed to review it. I'm up to gauss' law and am getting confused about one thing. If you have two infinitely long oppositely charged plates, solving for the total e field inside is done by making two gaussian surfaces that enclose each plate. Doing this gives the e field to be a constant between the plates.

My question is, why can't I make a gaussian "pillbox" inside the plates and enclosing zero charge and conclude that the flux through that surface is zero since the field goes in one side and leaves through the other? Obviously I'm making a mistake here somewhere because the field in between the plates is NOT zero but I can't figure out what the mistake is.

Sure you can do that. The conclusion from Gauss' law is that the pillbox encloses no charge. This is not an unexpected result :smile:
 
Okay but doesn't that mean the electric field inside that pillbox is zero? I am just getting confused because when you have a charged spherical shell, the field inside is zero because there is no charge.
 
beardo34 said:
Okay but doesn't that mean the electric field inside that pillbox is zero? I am just getting confused because when you have a charged spherical shell, the field inside is zero because there is no charge.

No, you can place such a pillbox anywhere in a given electric field where the enclosed charge is zero, yet there is still a field. This tells you that there is no contribution to the field from inside the pillbox.

The Gaussian surface inside a charged spherical shell tells you the same thing -- no enclosed charge and no contribution from inside the pillbox. The field inside the shell is zero for other reasons (see: Newton's Shell Theorem).
 
Ohh okay, that's what I was missing. Thanks a lot!
 
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 .
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...
Back
Top