Finding potential of a cone using Laplaces Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Miike012
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cone Potential
AI Thread Summary
Laplace's Equation is applied to determine the electric potential of a cone, with the potential varying primarily with the angle theta, which is the angle between the positive Z-axis and the cone's surface. The discussion highlights that the potential does not depend on the azimuthal angle phi or the radial distance r, as changes in these coordinates do not affect the potential when theta is held constant. The surface of the cone acts as an equipotential surface, meaning the electric field is perpendicular to it. The potential varies with theta because different cones, defined by distinct theta values, exhibit different potentials on their surfaces. This analysis is crucial for understanding the behavior of conductors and equipotential surfaces in electrostatics.
Miike012
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
0
In the example in the attachment, Laplaces Equation is used to find the potential of a cone.

My qustion is, How do they know the potential only varies with angle theta (theta is the angle between the positive Z-axis and the surface of the cone.)
 

Attachments

  • QQQQQQ.jpg
    QQQQQQ.jpg
    7.7 KB · Views: 544
Physics news on Phys.org
Good question. After all, in the gap ##\theta=0## and the potential goes from 0 to V0 over a (very short?) distance !
And: does it say (somewhere on the previous page, for example) that the cone is conducting and infinite ?
 
Coming back to your question: You are inclined to believe V does not depend on ##\phi## ? If so, why / why not ?

The only other spherical coordinate I can think of is r. Look at the picture and compare a picture of a point with r = 5 to a picture of a point with same theta and with r = 1, but that pictre is five times enlarged.
 
I know the E-Filed at a point on the surface of the cone is perpendicular to the surface of the cone. Therefore the surface of the cone is an equipotential surface.

In spherical coordinates we have (R,θ,ø)
R is the distance from the origin
θ is the angle from the positive z-axis
ø is the angle from the positive x-axis

Looking at the picture in the attachment you can see as R changes (The orange line) while ø and θ are constant, The potential does not change

Now changing ø while keeping R and θ constant, V does not change

Now changing θ while keeping R and ø constant, V changes.. Assuming that the potential on the surface of the blue cone is different from the surface of the green cone.

Thats the best explanation I can come up with
 

Attachments

  • LLL.png
    LLL.png
    8.7 KB · Views: 613
Just another though,
considering the surface of a conductor, we know the equipotential surfaces very neer the surface of the conductor is neerly the shape of that conductor.
Therefore, by knowing the equation of the surface we also know the equation of the equapotential lines neer the surface of the conductor.
(Getting to my point very soon)
Take a Conducting Sphere for example, We can represent the sphere in spherical coordinates by R, if I am correct I believe V varies by R.
Take a parallel plate capacitor, two plates parallel to the xy plane, one plate in the plane Z = 0 and Z = zi. essentially you can think of the surface of one of the capacitors as a constant function of Z.. and varies in the Z direction..
NOW the cone. A distinc surface of a cone is defined by keeping the angle θ between the +z-axis constant, hence V for distinct cones vary by θ in spherical coord.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top