EM field between 2 superimpose spheres

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luchopas
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Em Field Spheres
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves two partially overlapping spheres, each with a uniform charge density of opposite signs. The objective is to determine the electric field in the hollow section between the spheres, given their radii and the distance vector between their centers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the electric field inside a uniformly charged sphere and consider the implications of superimposing two such spheres. There are attempts to apply Gauss's Law and questions about the calculations for the electric field in different regions.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring the problem, with some providing hints and guidance on using Gauss's Law. There is ongoing clarification regarding the electric field inside the spheres and how to calculate the enclosed charge for different regions.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the calculations and the application of concepts, indicating a need for further clarification on integrating charge density and understanding the electric field's behavior in overlapping regions.

  • #31
Right!

So, \textbf{E}=\frac{\rho\textbf{d}}{3\epsilon_0}

:smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
gabbagabbahey said:
Right!

So, \textbf{E}=\frac{\rho\textbf{d}}{3\epsilon_0}

:smile:

got it, thank you very much.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Well, it's your homework problem so it doesn't really matter whether I'm sure, what's important is whether or not you're sure.

You seem to have doubts... is there a reason you doubt this result? Is there some part of the above analysis you are uncomfortable with?
 
  • #34
gabbagabbahey said:
Well, it's your homework problem so it doesn't really matter whether I'm sure, what's important is whether or not you're sure.

You seem to have doubts... is there a reason you doubt this result? Is there some part of the above analysis you are uncomfortable with?

mm not really just was a moment of doubt, but you got me convinced.
thanks
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
5K