Electric potential of a line of charge

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric potential at a point perpendicular to one end of a uniformly charged line. The user derives the electric field using Gauss's Law but encounters confusion regarding the area of the Gaussian cylinder, leading to an incorrect factor in the final potential equation. The correct expression for electric potential should include a factor of 4πε_0 instead of 2πε_0, highlighting a misunderstanding of symmetry in the charge distribution. The conversation also briefly touches on the electric potential from a point charge, indicating a broader context of electric potential calculations. Understanding the application of Gauss's Law and symmetry is crucial for accurate results in electrostatics.
channel1
Messages
70
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the electric potential at a point d perpendicular to one end of a line of charge with a positive uniform linear charge density lambda, length L, and negligible thickness.



Homework Equations



EdA=q/ε_0
A = 2πdL
V_f - V_i = -integral(Eds)


The Attempt at a Solution



for E i get λ/(2πDε_0) by drawing a gaussian cylinder around the line of charge and then i plug that into the integral for V which turns into V = Ed*ln|(L+(d^2+L^2 )^(1/2))/d|

the answer i get is V= λ/(2πε_0 ) ln|(L+(d^2+L^2 )^(1/2))/d| which is correct except that i should have a 4πε_0 instead of a 2πε_0 but i don't understand why since the area of my gaussian cylinder is 2πdL
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you *sure* the area is 2*pi*d*L?
 
...yes? lol i mean the way i drew my diagram charge would only be coming out of the middle of the cylinder. i mean i acknowledge that I am making a mistake somewhere in there but i can't for the life of me see why.
 
Gauss's Law isn't applicable here.

There's not sufficient symmetry.

What is the electric potential at a distance R from a point charge with a charge of Q ?
 
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 '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