Electromagnetism and a solid metallic sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on applying Gauss' law to determine the electric field around a metallic sphere, which is a conductor. It clarifies that the electric field at the surface of a conductor is given by E = σ/ε₀ when there is a conductor on one side, while E = σ/(2ε₀) applies when there is free space on both sides. Participants highlight the need for clarity in the problem statement to avoid confusion between these two scenarios. The conversation concludes with an acknowledgment that the question's wording may have led to misunderstandings regarding the application of Gauss' law. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for correctly deriving the electric field in this context.
Jozefina Gramatikova
Messages
62
Reaction score
9

Homework Statement


upload_2018-8-23_17-36-2.png


Homework Equations


upload_2018-8-23_17-39-1.png


The Attempt at a Solution


39993406_927774120767135_7069655820077629440_n.jpg

The textbook says that the electric field on a surface of a conductor is:
upload_2018-8-23_17-40-11.png
. So, I guess since the sphere is metallic I can assume that what I have written there is true?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-8-23_17-36-2.png
    upload_2018-8-23_17-36-2.png
    29.1 KB · Views: 587
  • upload_2018-8-23_17-39-1.png
    upload_2018-8-23_17-39-1.png
    933 bytes · Views: 586
  • upload_2018-8-23_17-40-11.png
    upload_2018-8-23_17-40-11.png
    1,019 bytes · Views: 298
  • 39993406_927774120767135_7069655820077629440_n.jpg
    39993406_927774120767135_7069655820077629440_n.jpg
    42.8 KB · Views: 616
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer for the electric field ## E ## of a flat sheet with surface charge density ## \sigma ## needs some qualification here. A surface charge density of ## \sigma ## gives the result by Gauss' law that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ## if there is a conductor on one side, but otherwise the result is ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ## if there is free space on both sides. It is the first case that applies here. ## \\ ## Gauss' law says that the electric flux which is ## \int E \cdot dA=\frac{Q_{enclosed}}{\epsilon_o} ##. It is difficult to explain the idea of flux without a chalkboard, but perhaps what I have given you will be helpful. ## \\ ## If you understand Gauss' law, deriving the result that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ## at the surface of a conductor is very straightforward.
 
  • Like
Likes Jozefina Gramatikova
Charles Link said:
The answer for the electric field ## E ## of a flat sheet with surface charge density ## \sigma ## needs some qualification here. A surface charge density of ## \sigma ## gives the result by Gauss' law that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ## if there is a conductor on one side, but otherwise the result is ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ## if there is free space on both sides. It is the first case that applies here. ## \\ ## Gauss' law says that the electric flux which is ## \int E \cdot dA=\frac{Q_{enclosed}}{\epsilon_o} ##. It is difficult to explain the idea of flux without a chalkboard, but perhaps what I have given you will be helpful. ## \\ ## If you understand Gauss' law, deriving the result that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ## at the surface of a conductor is very straightforward.
what do you mean by "if there is free space on both sides"?
 
Jozefina Gramatikova said:
what do you mean by "if there is free space on both sides"?
A layer of surface charge where you have air on both sides when you draw what is called a Gaussian pillbox around a section of area ## A ## of surface charge density ## \sigma ##. When you calculate the flux on the "inside", the conductor necessarily has ## E=0 ## inside the conductor, so there is no contribution to the flux from the inside surface. Alternatively, if there is air on both sides, both sides get the same outward pointing ## E ## and the result is ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## (In full detail, for the conductor case: ## \int E \cdot dA=EA=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o} ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## And for the case with air on both sides: ## \int E \cdot dA=2 E A=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o } ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ## ).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Jozefina Gramatikova
Charles Link said:
A layer of surface charge where you have air on both sides when you draw what is called a Gaussian pillbox around a section of area ## A ## of surface charge density ## \sigma ##. When you calculate the flux on the "inside", the conductor necessarily has ## E=0 ## inside the conductor, so there is no contribution to the flux from the inside surface. Alternatively, if there is air on both sides, both sides get the same outward pointing ## E ## and the result is ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## (In full detail, for the conductor case: ## \int E \cdot dA=EA=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o} ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## And for the case with air on both sides: ## \int E \cdot dA=2 E A=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o } ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ## ).
Oh, damn. I finally understood it! Thank you so much! It actually makes sense!
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Charles Link said:
A layer of surface charge where you have air on both sides when you draw what is called a Gaussian pillbox around a section of area ## A ## of surface charge density ## \sigma ##. When you calculate the flux on the "inside", the conductor necessarily has ## E=0 ## inside the conductor, so there is no contribution to the flux from the inside surface. Alternatively, if there is air on both sides, both sides get the same outward pointing ## E ## and the result is ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## (In full detail, for the conductor case: ## \int E \cdot dA=EA=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o} ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_o} ##. ## \\ ## And for the case with air on both sides: ## \int E \cdot dA=2 E A=\frac{\sigma A}{\epsilon_o } ##, so that ## E=\frac{\sigma}{2 \epsilon_o} ## ).
So, the solution to part A) is:
upload_2018-8-23_19-32-35.png

and part C) is:
upload_2018-8-23_19-32-59.png
?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-8-23_19-32-35.png
    upload_2018-8-23_19-32-35.png
    1.8 KB · Views: 619
  • upload_2018-8-23_19-32-59.png
    upload_2018-8-23_19-32-59.png
    1.7 KB · Views: 612
Jozefina Gramatikova said:
So, the solution to part A) is: View attachment 229715
and part C) is: View attachment 229716 ?
Part A needs to be described in more detail, and they need to specify "with a conductor on one side". Without that additional detail being included, part C does not follow. I do think this my have been an oversight on the part of the person who made up the question.
 
Charles Link said:
Part A needs to be described in more detail, and they need to specify "with a conductor on one side". Without that additional detail being included, part C does not follow. I do think this my have been an oversight on the part of the person who made up the question.
It says it is a metallic sphere so isn't it a conductor?
 
Jozefina Gramatikova said:
It says it is a metallic sphere so isn't it a conductor?
Yes, that means it's a conductor, but they did not tell you in part A to derive the Gauss' law for the case of conductor material on one side of the Gaussian pillbox. It is a very good result that they are having you derive, but they need to present the question with sufficient detail that you get the correct result. There are two different cases that can occur. The case with air on both sides is not relevant here, but if you just read part A, it would appear that's what they are asking for.
 
  • Like
Likes Jozefina Gramatikova
  • #10
Charles Link said:
Yes, that means it's a conductor, but they did not tell you in part A to derive the Gauss' law for the case of conductor material on one side of the Gaussian pillbox. It is a very good result that they are having you derive, but they need to present the question with sufficient detail that you get the correct result. There are two different cases that can occur. The case with air on both sides is not relevant here, but if you just read part A, it would appear that's what they are asking for.
I see. Thank you!
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Back
Top