Electric Fields of straight wire

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the distance from a long, straight wire where the electric field magnitude equals 2.57 N/C, given a charge per unit length (lambda) of 1.47×10-10 C/m. The correct formula to use is r = (2kλ) / E, where k = 1/(4πε0) and ε0 = 8.85×10-12 F/m. After evaluating the equation, the correct distance is found to be approximately 1.03×10-3 m, although discrepancies in calculations were noted, particularly regarding the value of ε0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric fields and charge distributions
  • Familiarity with the formula for electric fields around charged wires
  • Knowledge of constants such as ε0 (permittivity of free space)
  • Basic algebra for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of the electric field around a straight wire
  • Learn about the significance of ε0 in electrostatics
  • Practice using LaTeX for formatting physics equations
  • Explore common pitfalls in online calculations and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone involved in solving electrostatic problems related to charged wires.

stylez03
Messages
139
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A very long, straight wire has charge per unit length 1.47×10^10

At what distance from the wire is the electric field magnitude equal to 2.57 N/C


Homework Equations



E = lambda / (2*pi*E_o*r)

E_o = 8.85*10^-9


The Attempt at a Solution



2*pi*E_o*E / lambda = r

Is this correct so far?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks fine you just need to plug the numbers in.
 
r = 2*pi*(8.85*10^-9)*(2.57) / (1.47*10^-10)

I'm not sure if lambda is represented correctly and is E just 2.57 or should it be 10^(something)
 
E will just be 2.57 as stated in the problem. Why are you worried about lambda?
 
I wasn't sure if lambda = 1.47*10^-10
 
probably more likely to be x10-10 than the other way round.
 
Kurdt said:
probably more likely to be x10-10 than the other way round.

Thats what I had before 1.47 x 10^-10
 
What is it in the question?
 
Kurdt said:
What is it in the question?

The original question was if lambda = 1.47 x 10^-10.

You said yes, so I just wanted to make sure.
 
  • #10
2*pi*(8.85*10^-9)*(2.57) / (1.47*10^-10) = r

This evaluated to:
r = 972

The online program says I'm off by an additive constant??
 
  • #11
I've just noticed you have E on top of the fraction and lambda below. You need to swap these two so the equation is:

r=\frac{2k\lambda}{E}

Like I said in a previous thread, try manipulating equations with just their symbols until the very last moment. Its a lot easier to spot problems that way.

EDIT: Sorry k=\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0}
 
Last edited:
  • #12
2* (1/4*pi* 8.85*10^-9) * (1.47*10^-10) / 2.57

= 1.03×10−3

Still says I'm off by a additive constant.
 
  • #13
I think you've made a mistake in the calculation as i get a different answer. Try it again you're 3 orders of magnitude out.
 
  • #14
Where did you get that value of epsilon nought from? It should be: 8.85x10-12
 
  • #15
Kurdt said:
Where did you get that value of epsilon nought from? It should be: 8.85x10-12

I need to be more careful from paper to online input. I have so much scratch work, some how I changed the epsilon value =[
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K