Follow up on the 2 spheres capacitor problem. Help needed before tomorrow

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa...
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Capacitor Spheres
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the capacitance of two isolated conducting spheres with charges +Q and -Q, separated by a large distance compared to their radius. The user initially derives the potential difference using Coulomb's law and integrates the electric field, but encounters an issue resulting in a capacitance of zero, which is not feasible. Suggestions include using a Taylor expansion to approximate the capacitance, leading to a revised formula that incorporates terms for both R and L. The conversation emphasizes careful bookkeeping in calculations and the significance of the potential difference in determining capacitance. The final consensus suggests that the Taylor expansion approach is valid for resolving the problem.
Lisa...
Messages
189
Reaction score
0
Follow up on the 2 spheres capacitor problem. Help needed before tomorrow!

It was probably a bit hard to see what the old topic was about, so I started a new one. I'm still not quite sure on this problem, so I'd REALLY appreciate it if somebody could clear things up a little bit more. The problem is the following one:

Two isolated conducting spheres of equal radius have charges +Q (#1)and -Q (#2) respectively. If they are separated by a large distance compared to their radius, what is the capacitance of this unusual capacitor?

I've drawn this picture:

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/7725/naamloos6ha.gif

The origin is in the center of the left sphere.


This is what I've found till now:

C= \frac{Q}{V}
In this case Q= Q = the absolute charge on every sphere.
V= the potential difference between #1 and #2, given by V= - \int_{#1}^{#2} E dl = = \int_{#2}^{#1} E dl
with dl= dxi +dyj+dzk

The electric field due both spheres is determined by Coulombs law (E= \frac{kQ}{r^2}).
Pick a point at a distance r from the origin somewhere on the drawn x-axis. In that point the E field of #1 and #2 is felt in the positive x direction (#1 is positive, so the field lines take off from #1 and #2 is negative, so the field lines approach #2). Therefore the magnitudes of the electric fields of #1 and #2 add and the resultant E is in the positive x direction.

The distance from the point P to the center of #1 (in the origin)= r.
Therefore E_1= \frac{kQ}{r^2}
The distance from the point P to the center of #2 = [L+2R]-r.
Therefore E_2= \frac{kQ}{([L+2R]-r)^2}
And E total= \frac{kQ}{r^2} + \frac{kQ}{([L+2R]-r)^2}

Now substitute this in the integral V= \int_{#2}^{#1} E dl with values of:

E= E total= \frac{kQ}{r^2} + \frac{kQ}{([L+2R]-r)^2}
dl= dr, with dr the projection of dl in radial direction and
#1= R
#2= L+R

(that is the domain of the space between the two spheres where the point P can be chosen in)

This gives:

V= \int_{L+R}^{R} \frac{kQ}{r^2} + \frac{kQ}{([L+2R]-r)^2} dr = \left[ - \frac{kQ}{r} + \frac{kQ}{([L+2R]-r)}\right]_{L+R}^{R} =<br /> ( - \frac{kQ}{R} + \frac{kQ}{(L+R)}) - (-\frac{kQ}{L+R} + \frac{kQ}{(R)}) =
\frac{2kQ}{L+R} - \frac{2kQ}{R}= \frac{2kQR-2kQ(L+R)}{R (L+R)}= \frac{2kQR-2kQL -2kQR)}{R (L+R)}= \frac{-2kQL}{R (L+R)}

Substituting this into the formula of C= \frac{Q}{V} provides:

C= \frac{Q}{ \frac{-2kQL}{R (L+R)}}= \frac{Q R (L+R)}{-2kQ}= \frac{R (L+R)}{-2k}

But given is R<<L, so R= 0 which gives me a C of 0, which can't be possible! So what have I done wrong?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is a Taylor Expansion a good possibility?

If so this gives me:

C= \frac{-R}{2k} - \frac{-R^2}{kL}

Is this the right way? & Have I obtained the correct answer? & How do I know if 2 terms of the expansion are enough: do I need to use only 1?
 
Last edited:
Or maybe I shouldn't let R go to zero? Then again: a negative capacitance is pretty odd...
 
you found a negative capacitance from your negative Potential Difference.
Your Potential Difference was negative because you integrated
FROM large x-values TO small x-values, instead of along the E-field.
No big deal.

The 2kQ/R was expected ... but the Potential at the +Q was decreased
as the -Q moved in , from infinity far away to only (L+R) away.
The Potential at the -Q sphere went up as +Q came in from infinity to L+R

L >> R means that you can neglect R/L relative to 1 ... L+R = L(1 + R/L) ~ L .

careful with your bookkeeping, I think you lost an L at the end.
dV = 2kQ/R - 2kQ/L => C = R/2k + R^2/2kL
 
So the Taylor expansion is a good idea?
 
Last edited:
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