Finding the magnitude of an electric field at a distance from a surface charge

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field intensity at a specific distance from a long, straight conductor with a given charge density. The original poster attempts to apply Gauss's law to find the electric field but expresses confusion regarding the relevance of the conductor's radius in their calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Gauss's law and the significance of the Gaussian surface radius versus the conductor's radius. There is a focus on understanding how to correctly identify the relevant parameters for calculating the electric field.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications regarding the use of the Gaussian surface and its radius, suggesting that the radius of the conductor is not necessary for the calculation of the electric field at the specified distance. The conversation reflects a productive exchange of ideas, with participants questioning assumptions and clarifying concepts.

Contextual Notes

There is an implied understanding that the problem may include elements designed to test comprehension of the concepts involved, particularly regarding the relevance of certain parameters in the context of electric fields and Gaussian surfaces.

NewtonianAlch
Messages
453
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the magnitude of the electric field intensity at a distance 0.15m from the axis of a long, straight conductor, which has radius 0.03m, and a charge density of 4.0 C/m.


Homework Equations


Eflux = E.A
Eflux = q/e0
q = sigma*h


The Attempt at a Solution



Eflux = E*Area
Thus, Eflux = E*2pi*r*h (Surface area of the gaussian cylinder we superimpose over the conductor)

Also, Eflux = q/e0 -> where e0 is the permittivity of free space and q is the enclosed charge in the gaussian surface.

q = sigma*h

Therefore we substitute for the q, and equate the two Eflux equations to get:

Eflux = E*2pi*r*h = sigma*h/e0

Solve for E and we get:

E = sigma/(2pi*r*e0)

Now we substitute the given values:

4/(2pi*(0.03)*(8.85*10^-12)) = 2.40*E12 or 2.40*10^12 N/C

I have no idea how to find the electric field at the distance 0.15m away from the surface. Please help! I would need the value of q to do this, however this is not a point charge we're dealing with but a surface charge, so I'm a bit lost.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you look back over your logic, you should see that the r you plug into the final formula is not the radius of the charged cylinder, it's the radius of the Gaussian surface, which is 0.15m. The radius of the cylinder is actually irrelevant.
 
Mike Pemulis said:
If you look back over your logic, you should see that the r you plug into the final formula is not the radius of the charged cylinder, it's the radius of the Gaussian surface, which is 0.15m. The radius of the cylinder is actually irrelevant.

Wow...I can't believe I didn't notice that inflating the imaginary Gaussian surface would give the required 'r' of 0.15m.

Though...why would they give the radius of the cylinder if it had no part in it?
 
To see if you would make this mistake. :smile: One note: as long as the Gaussian cylinder is outside the wire, the radius of the wire doesn't matter. But another common problem you may encounter is to find the E field inside the wire some distance from the center -- then, the radius of the wire matters.
 
Teachers do that a lot. It's to confuse you and see that you really understand the problem.
 
Mike Pemulis said:
To see if you would make this mistake. :smile: One note: as long as the Gaussian cylinder is outside the wire, the radius of the wire doesn't matter. But another common problem you may encounter is to find the E field inside the wire some distance from the center -- then, the radius of the wire matters.

Hmm yea, I've noticed that kind of question appears to be common with coaxial wires.

Thank you for your help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K