Electric field on the surface of charged conducting sphere?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the electric field on the surface of a charged conducting sphere, exploring theoretical and conceptual aspects of electric fields in relation to point charges and the nature of conductors. Participants examine the behavior of the electric field just above, below, and at the surface of the sphere, as well as the implications of point charges in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the electric field just above the surface of the sphere is given by (kq/r^2), while it is zero just below the surface, questioning whether it is also zero exactly on the surface.
  • Another participant raises the issue of how to measure the electric field on the surface and at the point of a charge, arguing that the formula (kq/r^2) may not be accurate when approaching a point charge microscopically.
  • A third participant emphasizes that the discussion is based on idealized models of physics, noting that real conductors are not perfectly spherical and point charges are theoretical constructs, which complicates the understanding of electric fields.
  • Another participant explains that a charged conducting surface in a stationary state carries a surface charge, leading to a jump in the electric field across the surface equal to the surface-charge density, with specific values for the electric field inside and outside the sphere.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of the electric field at the surface of the sphere and the nature of point charges, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in the idealized models used, including assumptions about the nature of conductors and point charges, which may not accurately reflect real-world complexities.

mohamed el teir
Messages
88
Reaction score
1
just above the surface it's (kq/r^2) where r is the radius of the sphere and just below the surface it's zero, so is the electric field zero also exactly on the surface ? (as the q enclosed then will be zero since the flux is coming from the surface and not actually penetrating it)
and concerning the point charge, is the electric field also zero at the exact position of the point charge ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the answer to this question is hiding in another question:
How do you measure the the electric field on the surface?
How do you measure the electric field at the point of the chrage?

about the point charge i think that:
1. the formula (kq/r^2) is not corect when you get microscopicly close to the electron.
2. the notion - " the exact position of the point charge" is undefine.
 
Mohamed, you must realize that you are learning physics in an idealised world - sometimes called a model. In the real world conductors aren't spherical (they're bumpy due to the atoms making them up) and point charges don't exist. These are mathematical fictions that avoid having to deal with the tremendous complexity of real life (TM).
You can easily see one problem of a point charge by taking your charged sphere, calculating the field at the centre and at 2r from the centre, and letting r go to zero. You end up with two different values (one infinite, one zero) for the field at the same point r=0. It took several centuries for the charge of the electron to be understood - you'll need to have faith and be patient when the models reach their limits and can't provide an answer.
 
The point is that a charged conducting surface in the stationary state carries a surface charge, and thus the elecric field's radial component makes a jump across the surface equalling the surface-charge density (charge per area) (modulo artificial factors if SI units are used). Inside the electric field is 0, outside along the surface it's ##\sigma/\epsilon_0=Q/(4 \pi \epsilon_0 R^2)##, where ##R## is the radius of the sphere, and ##\epsilon_0## is the artificial conversion factor due to the use of SI units.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
974
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K