Gauss' Law and Infinite plane sheet of charge

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the application of Gauss' Law to determine the electric field of an infinite plane sheet of charge. Participants explore the choice of Gaussian surfaces, particularly the use of cylinders versus cubes, and the implications of symmetry in these selections.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes the use of a cylinder to calculate the electric field due to an infinite plane sheet of charge, referencing the equation 2EA = \frac {\sigma A} {\epsilon} derived from Gauss' Law.
  • Another participant clarifies that while a Gaussian cylinder is typically used, other shapes like cubes can also be employed as long as symmetry is taken into account.
  • A participant questions whether a cube would maintain the necessary symmetry properties, particularly regarding the alignment of electric field and normal vectors on surfaces parallel to the sheet.
  • Concerns are raised about why textbooks predominantly feature cylinders over cubes, with one participant speculating that it may be due to the convenience of using the same shape for different charge distributions.
  • Participants discuss the reasoning behind the electric field being parallel to the normal vector on surfaces parallel to the sheet, with one suggesting that components of the electric field not perpendicular to the sheet must cancel out.
  • Requests for visual aids or applets to better understand the symmetry properties of the electric field are made, indicating a desire for further clarification on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that symmetrical surfaces are preferable for applying Gauss' Law, but there remains uncertainty about the specific advantages of using a cylinder over a cube and the nature of the electric field's orientation relative to the surfaces.

Contextual Notes

Participants express limitations in visualizing the symmetry properties and the cancellation of electric field components, indicating a need for further resources or examples to aid understanding.

ximath
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

I am studying Gauss' law and have learned that using symmetry, we need to select a cyclinder in order to calculate electric field of an infinite plane sheet of charge.

2EA = \frac {\sigma A} {\epsilon}

That equation is written using Gauss' law and hence E field is found.

However, why wouldn't we use a cube instead of the cyclinder, for instance ?

Moreover, I am not able to understand why the cyclinder is suitable. (I know it is due to the symmetry arguments, but why ? ) I mean, the normal vector on the surface needs to be parallel to E field if we select the cyclinder. However, I can't see why would E field be parallel to the normal vector.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Realize that the Gaussian cylinder is oriented so that its flat ends (not its curved surface) are parallel to the sheet of charge.

You are free to use any shape Gaussian surface you wish, as long as you can take advantage of symmetry. For an infinite sheet you can use a cube, cylinder, and many other kinds of surfaces to derive the electric field.
 
Hi Doc Al, thanks a lot!

As far as I know I am free to choose any closed surface in fact, however, symmetrical ones are preferable since they help us calculate the electric field.

If I used a cube instead of a cylinder, would it also have the symmetry property ? In other words, on the surface of that plane (which is parallel to the sheet), would electric field and normal vectors be parallel everywhere ? If this is the case, then why would all the textbooks mention about the cylinder but not about a cube as an instance ? One more thing I am trying to realize is why E field is parallel to the normal vector everywhere on the surface that is parallel to the sheet... I think the E field components that are not perpendicular to the sheet must be canceled somehow, but I am having some problems imagining that. Do you have any visual Java applets or even images that explain this symmetry property ?
 
ximath said:
As far as I know I am free to choose any closed surface in fact, however, symmetrical ones are preferable since they help us calculate the electric field.
Exactly.

If I used a cube instead of a cylinder, would it also have the symmetry property ? In other words, on the surface of that plane (which is parallel to the sheet), would electric field and normal vectors be parallel everywhere ?
Sure.
If this is the case, then why would all the textbooks mention about the cylinder but not about a cube as an instance ?
Beats me! (Maybe so they can use the same shape for a line of charge.)

One more thing I am trying to realize is why E field is parallel to the normal vector everywhere on the surface that is parallel to the sheet...
If the field did point in some other direction (not perpendicular to the surface) what would determine the direction? The sheet of charge is uniform in all directions, so no one direction can be chosen.
I think the E field components that are not perpendicular to the sheet must be canceled somehow, but I am having some problems imagining that. Do you have any visual Java applets or even images that explain this symmetry property ?
I don't have any off hand, but you might find something if you Google it.
 
This thread look to be long dead... however, I did find it useful. I had the same question (more or less) as the OP and post #4 did a good job of explaining things. Thanks Doc Al.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
533
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K