Equipotential Cylinder: Can Method of Images Work?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving the potential outside an infinite conducting grounded cylinder influenced by an infinite string with linear charge density. The method of images is proposed to find an equivalent charge configuration that maintains the cylinder as an equipotential surface. The challenge arises from the requirement that the potential V must equal zero, complicating the placement of the image charge. An equation is derived to relate the distances and charge densities of the actual and image strings, leading to a need for further calculation of these parameters. The conversation emphasizes the similarity to a 3D problem, indicating a methodical approach to finding the solution.
neworder1
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
An infinite string with linear charge density \lambda is put parallel to the axis of an infinite conducting grounded cylinder (V=0) of radius R, the distance between the string and the center of the cylinder is l. Find the potential outside the cylinder.

Is it possible to solve this problem using the method of images, i.e. placing an image string with some charge density \lambda_{1} inside the cylinder so that the cylinder will be an equipotential surface? If V weren't 0, I could place a string of equal charge (i.e. -\lambda) somwehere inside and it should work, but for V=0, the charges can't be equal.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it is the 2D example of a charge outside a sphere.
 
Ok, but how do I calculate this? If I place an image string with charge \lambda_{1} inside the cylinder, at distance a from the center,I get the following equation for equipotential surfaces:
\lambda ln(r)-\lambda_{1} ln(r_{1})=C, where r, r_{1} are distances form resp. 1st and 2nd string. Now if I put C=0 (since on the surface of the cylinder V=0, and I want the cylinder to be an equipotential surface), I get:
\lambda ln(r)=\lambda_{1} ln(r_{1}). Now I need to calculate \lambda_{1} and a from this. Any help?
 
It's done like the 3D problem.
Write (R\hat{r}-{\vec L})e^\lambda=(R\hat{r}-{\vec L}')e^{-\lambda'}.
Then let L'=R^2/L.
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top