Electric field slab, nonuniform charge density

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on applying Gauss's Law to determine the electric field around a non-conducting slab with a non-uniform charge density, ρ = αx². For part A, the electric field is calculated using a Gaussian surface that encompasses the charge within the slab, yielding E = αL³/(24ε₀). In part B, the user questions whether the electric field's magnitude changes when using a different Gaussian surface, as they obtained the same result for the field outside the slab. The conversation highlights the importance of consistency in applying Gauss's Law, regardless of the chosen method. The electric field due to a charge distribution remains consistent across different approaches if calculated correctly.
AKJ1
Messages
43
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A rather large non conducting slab of area A and thickness d has a charge density given by ρ = αx2.
The origin is through the center of the slab. That is, it bisects the slab into two equal volumes of d/2 thickness and with an area A, with -L/2 to the left of x=0 and L/2 to the right of x=0.

A. Gaussian surface (Cylinder) is positioned such that its volume encompasses the charge contained within the slab. Apply Gauss's Law to the cylinder to determine the electric field to the left and to the right of the slab.

B. Consider another cylinder that is located such that its left face at x = 0 and its right face is outside the slab at x>L/2. Apply Gauss's Law to determine the electric field to the right of the slab.

Homework Equations



E⋅dA = Qenc / ε0

ρ = Q/V

The Attempt at a Solution



A.
[/B]
dq = ρdV = (αx2)(Adx) [ I integrated this from 0→L/2]

Q = (AαL3 )/ 24

E is constant for this configuration

EA = Q/ε0

E = αL3/ (24ε0)

Now I realize I need to take into account the other half of the slab and the "domain" on x. That is, it will be in the positive x hat direction for x > 0. But this is my question..

B.


When I went to do part B, I don't see how my set-up or my solution will change much from the above. In fact, I got the same magnitude for the electric field.

Did I make a mistake somewhere?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does the electric field due to an assembly of charge depend on the method used to calcukate it?
 
Simon Bridge said:
Does the electric field due to an assembly of charge depend on the method used to calcukate it?

Good point :smile:
 
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...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top