Electric Field & Potential of infinite concentric cylinders

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field and potential of an infinite solid cylinder with a uniform linear charge density inside a hollow cylindrical pipe. Using Gauss's Law, the electric field for different regions was initially calculated, but there were concerns about accurately accounting for the charge densities and the geometry of the hollow cylinder. The user realized they had misapplied the charge densities, leading to incorrect electric field equations. They are seeking clarification on whether to include the thickness of the outer shell in their calculations. The potential calculation is pending until the electric field is correctly determined.
Zanker
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider an infinitely long solid cylinder of uniform linear charge density λ1 and radius a inside a hollow cylindrical pipe of inner radius b and outer radius c and uniform linear charge density λ2. A cross-sectional view of the system is shown below(linked and attached). Find the electric field everywhere and determine the electric potential everywhere, taking the outer surface of the pipe as the zero for the potential.

Homework Equations

/The attempt at a solution[/B]
I easily enough determined through Gauss's Law the Electric field from r=0 to r=a, using E*A = Q/ε0 to find E = (λ1*r)/(2ε0) and from r=a to r=b as E = (λ1*r)(a2)/(2*ε0*r). My question lies within the dealing of a non-shell hollow cylinder, and how I find the field produced within and outside of the area from r=b to r=c. My initial thought was that within the outer thick shell would be E = (λ2*r)/(2ε0) + (λ1*r)(a2)/(2*ε0*r), and outside the shell (r>c) would be E = (λ1*r)(a2)/(2*ε0*r) + (λ2*r)(c2)/(2*ε0*r). However, I feel like this doesn't necessarily cover all of my bases, since I feel like I am neglecting the b term. Should the E from the outer thick shell use (c-b)2 rather than just the c term? I think that would make more sense. I haven't tackled the potential portion yet, I feel that would be easier after I determine the field everywhere. Thanks for the help, this is my first time on the site.
 

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    2.7 KB · Views: 648
Physics news on Phys.org
Whelp, I also realized I calculated the E fields incorrectly, using λ1 and λ2 as charge densities rather than the linear charge densities they are. This means that my E from r=0 to r=a is (λ1*r)/(2πε0*a2), from r=a to r=b as E = (λ1)/(2*π*ε0*r) with the other equations following in suit.
 
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