Electric field problem - Plastic Slab

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field and potential due to a plastic slab with a uniform free charge density and a surface charge. The initial calculation using Gauss's Law yielded a constant electric field outside the slab, but the user is uncertain about the behavior of the electric field within the slab itself. It is clarified that the electric field inside the slab varies with distance from the edge, indicating that the field is not constant throughout. The need to consider the electric field's dependence on position within the slab is emphasized. Understanding these variations is crucial for accurately sketching the electric field and potential as functions of distance.
meteorologist1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Please consider this problem:
A plastic slab of thickness t has a uniform free charge density, +rho, embedded inside, and also one surface has a surface charge of -sigma. Find the electric fields here and sketch as a function of distance from one surface. Also find the potential as a function of distance, sketch results. [Ignore issues of dielectric polarizability, the function of the plastic is simply to fix the charges in place]

Here is what I did: I draw a Gaussian pillbox with area A. Only the top and bottom caps contribute where E and dA are parallel. The charge enclosed is: (rho)(A)(t) + (-sigma)(A) = A((rho)(t) - sigma)

By Gauss's Law, we have: 2EA = [A((rho)(t) - sigma)] / epsilon, so therefore, E = ((rho)(t) - sigma) / 2epsilon

I'm not sure what I did wrong here since the question asks to plot E as a function of r. In my case I would have a constant line. What did I do wrong? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe I also have to find the E field within the slab... That answer would depend on r. Any thoughts?
 
meteorologist1 said:
Maybe I also have to find the E field within the slab... That answer would depend on r. Any thoughts?

Yes. You've found the field outside the slab. The field inside depends on distance from edge.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top