Field due to a solid hemisphere with uniform charge density

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field at the center of a solid hemisphere with uniform charge density ρ and radius R. The primary equation used is Coulomb's law, expressed as E = (1/4πε₀) * (Q/r²), and the integration of electric fields from infinitesimal charge rings is emphasized. Participants clarify the concept of volume in relation to the cross-sectional area of the rings and address confusion regarding the thickness of these rings in the context of the electric field calculation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric fields and Coulomb's law
  • Familiarity with integration techniques in physics
  • Knowledge of charge density and its implications in electrostatics
  • Basic geometry of solid shapes, particularly hemispheres
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric fields from continuous charge distributions
  • Learn about the application of Gauss's Law in electrostatics
  • Explore the concept of electric potential and its relation to electric fields
  • Investigate the properties of 3D shapes and their cross-sectional areas in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, particularly those studying electromagnetism, educators teaching electrostatics, and anyone interested in advanced applications of calculus in physics.

PhizKid
Messages
477
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Given a solid hemisphere with radius R and uniform charge density ##/rho##, find the electric field at the center.

Homework Equations


##E = \frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \frac{Q}{r^{2}}##
##E = \frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} \int \frac{\rho (x',y',z') \hat{r} dx' dy' dz'}{r^{2}}##

The Attempt at a Solution



The strategy is to slice the hemisphere into rings around the symmetry axis, then find the electric field due to each ring, and then integrate over the rings to obtain the field due to the entire hemisphere.

I am confused by the diagram, though:

IeP99Jh.png


It says that a rectangle with side lengths dr and r dθ is the cross-sectional area, and that this cross-sectional area multiplied by 2πrsinθ is the volume, since the radius of the ring is rsinθ. However, isn't this just the circumference multiplied by the cross-sectional area? There is no thickness of the ring, so is it a volume? Are there more rings within the ring, towards the axis? (Like smaller rings within larger rings.) How come the thickness isn't mentioned here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
canceled
 
Last edited:
PhizKid said:
It says that a rectangle with side lengths dr and r dθ is the cross-sectional area, and that this cross-sectional area multiplied by 2πrsinθ is the volume, since the radius of the ring is rsinθ. However, isn't this just the circumference multiplied by the cross-sectional area?

It is.

There is no thickness of the ring, so is it a volume? Are there more rings within the ring, towards the axis? (Like smaller rings within larger rings.) How come the thickness isn't mentioned here?

Not sure what you mean here. The rings involved are 3D objects, and they definitely do have "thickness". The cross-section of a ring is a rectangle, as you said.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Actually, I am now confused about the radius used to compute the circumference. In the 2 circles within the hemisphere for the drawing, the 2 circles have different radii. Is it because both are approximately the same radius?
 
Let's assume that the cross-section is trapezoidal. What is its area then?
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
709
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
817
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K