Electric potential, hard problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the electric potential in the region between an infinite conducting plane and a cylindrical conductor with a linear charge density. The original poster expresses difficulty in determining the potential due to the complexity of the two-dimensional region and the behavior of the electric field.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the cylinder being infinite in length and the appropriateness of using infinity as a reference point for potential. There is mention of the method of images as a possible approach, though some express uncertainty about its application.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the problem, with participants questioning the assumptions regarding the length of the cylinder and the reference point for potential. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of the method of images and the behavior of electric fields near conductors.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that if the cylinder is infinite, using infinity as a reference for potential may lead to divergence, while a finite cylinder allows for its use. The discussion also touches on the implications of the infinite plane being conductive versus insulating.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,934
Reaction score
286

Homework Statement



There's a cylindrical conductor of radius d, whose linear charge density is [tex]\lambda[/tex] which is situated at a distance D from a infinite conductor plane.
1)Calculate the potential in the region that starts from the plane and ends at infinity (hence the cylindrical conductor is inside the region).
2)Determine the capacity of the system.

Homework Equations


None given. I guess [tex]\vec E=-\vec \nabla \phi[/tex].


The Attempt at a Solution


I realize I must find the potential in a 2 dimensional region, which seems really complicated to me.
What I've done so far is [tex]\phi (r)=-\int _{\infty}^r \vec E \cdot d\vec s[/tex]. I calculate the E field to be [tex]E=\frac{2k\lambda}{r}[/tex] outside the cylinder (inside E is worth 0 since it's a conductor, hence the potential inside the cylindrical conductor is constant and is worth the value of the potential over the surface of the cylindrical conductor).
But now, my big problem is that I have that [tex]\phi (r)=-\int _{\infty}^r \frac{2k\lambda dr}{r}=-2k\lambda \ln \left ( \frac{r}{\infty} \right )[/tex], which diverges... I don't know what I'm doing wrong. I feel really strange, how is that possible that I get all wrong? It seems so simple, however I keep getting impossible results.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is the cylinder infinite in length? It's not really clear from your problem statement.

If the cylinder is infinitely long, you can't pick infinity as a reference for the potential. It will blow up, as you have shown. You can still do the problem though, but you'll just have to pick some other point as your reference. In other words, instead of saying, "the potential with respect to infinity is this...", say, "the potential with respect to point A is...", once you've decided on a suitable point A.

On the other hand, if the cylinder is finite in length, you should be able to use infinity as a reference point. Of course the relevant equations will be a lot tougher to work with if the cylinder is finite in length.
 
Last edited:
collinsmark said:
Is the cylinder infinite in length? It's not really clear from your problem statement.

If the cylinder is infinitely long, you can't pick infinity as a reference for the potential. It will blow up, as you have shown. You can still do the problem though, but you'll just have to pick some other point as your reference. In other words, instead of saying, "the potential with respect to infinity is this...", say, "the potential with respect to point A is...", once you've decided on a suitable point A.

On the other hand, if the cylinder is finite in length, you should be able to use infinity as a reference point. Of course the relevant equations will be a lot tougher to work with if the cylinder is finite in length.
Thank you, it makes perfectly sense. Yes it is infinite. So basically if someone asks me what is the energy required to construct the configuration of charges (namely the charged cylinder), I have to say it's in fact impossible because the energy would be infinite.
Ok I understand that I have to define the difference of potential between 2 points, in which infinity is discarded.
I talked to a friend about this problem an hour ago, he told me to use the method of images. I'm not sure if it would work though. I never seen the demonstration nor the axioms that this method uses. Hence I have no idea if I can use it in this problem.
 
Forgive me, I may have spoken too soon. What I said before about not being able to choose infinity as a reference point would be true if the infinite plane was insulating, but you might be able to get by with using infinity as a reference because the infinite plane is conductive. Please forgive me for the confusion. Either way though, you could still do with problem if you picked some finite point.

Now back to the problem. There is a possible way to do this. Keep in mind the following things:

(a) The electric field lines immediately outside a static conductor (not carrying current) are always perpendicular to the surface.
(b) The electric field inside a static conductor is zero.
(c) This means that the charge distribution on the surface of the conductor aligns itself to force the electric field inside the conductor to be zero.

So the equipotential field lines created from the cylinder will always end up hitting the infinite plane conductor at right angles to the plane -- always.

What other situation could exactly model the electric field produced by this, at least in the region above the plane? (Hint: think mirror. Hint: what if we replaced the conductor [mirror] with a cylinder of opposite charge, in exactly the same place where the image of the first cylinder was in the mirror -- so instead of an image of a cylinder in a mirror there is actually another cylinder of opposite charge [and no mirror]).

[Edit] Before this edit, I said "sort of easy". I've now changed that to "possible."
 
Last edited:
Let me put it another way.

Consider placing the conducting plane such that it crosses the z-axis at z = 0, and runs along with both the x and y axes. Suppose the cylinder goes parallel to the y-axis at z = D.

Your vector variable [tex]\vec r[/tex] is in reference to the y-axis itself, not the center of the cylinder!

For the cylinder, create a new radius vector variable (I'm having a problem with getting my desired font for this variable, so I'm just going to use a capitol R -- I'd rather use a script r, but I can't seem to do it), called [tex]\vec R[/tex]. Define things such that

[tex]\vec r = \vec R + \vec D,[/tex]

where [tex]\vec D = (0, 0, D).[/tex]

In summary, [tex]\vec r[/tex] moves around the y-axis and [tex]\vec R[/tex] moves around the center of the cylinder. Therefore,

[tex]\vec R = \vec r - \vec D[/tex]

Now go ahead and solve the potential integral, choosing a point on the y-axis as the reference.

[tex]\phi(\vec R) - \phi(\vec D) = -\int _{D} ^{R} \frac{\lambda}{2 \pi \epsilon _{0}} \frac{1}{R'} dR'[/tex]

Note that under the integral, [tex]R[/tex] and [tex]D[/tex] are scalars -- the absolute values of corresponding vectors. That is intentional. Here, [tex]R'[/tex] is a dummy scalar variable that gets integrated out. Note that the above integral is for a wire. Do whatever you think is necessary to properly represent a cylinder.

Then make the substitution to get the equation for [tex]\phi(\vec r).[/tex] When you make the substitution, remember [tex]R = \left| \vec r - \vec D \right|[/tex].

But you're not finished yet. You need to do the same thing again for the image cylinder -- the image created by the conductor. Then sum the results together.

But remember to place the image on the other side of the conductor. That means your equation that relates [tex]\vec R[/tex], [tex]\vec D[/tex], and [tex]\vec r[/tex] will be a little different.

Also remember to give the [tex]\lambda[/tex] a minus sign, since its negative the charge of the real cylinder.

I chose the y-axis as my reference. But after you complete everything above, if you let r --> infinity, the potential doesn't blow up. So if you wish, at this point you can switch to using infinity as your reference by adding a constant, if you wanted to. ('Turns out to be trivial in the case, I believe. Quite trivial, in fact.)
 
Last edited:
Sorry for being so late, but thanks a lot for your help!
 

Similar threads

Replies
64
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K