Gauss's Law insulating cylinder concentric shell

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a homework problem related to Gauss's Law involving an insulating cylinder and a concentric shell. Participants express difficulty in interpreting the handwritten solutions due to clarity issues, particularly with variable definitions and formatting. There is confusion regarding the use of variables, specifically substituting 'a' for 'r' and the implications of ignoring end effects in calculations. Suggestions are made to improve the clarity of posted work by using LaTeX and ensuring attachments are correctly oriented. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of clear communication in solving complex physics problems.
ilovetswift
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


photo.jpg


photo2.jpg



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not sure if I am doing part a,b,e, and f correctly
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You'd get more responses if you were to post attachments that are the right way up! Even after rotation, the handwritten parts are pretty hard to read.
For a), the denominator is hard to read, but it looks like .1π(.01)2, which would be right.
For b), you seem to have used 'a' in place of the given variable r, and used r as the .01m radius. The cylinder length is ten times the radius, so I would think you are supposed to ignore end effects. If I ignore that term in the denominator and simplify what's left, it seems to give a value which increases with distance from the central cylinder, which cannot be right.
Pls take the trouble to post your working in LaTex, or write very clearly (no still-visible rubbings out!). It would also help if you were to define your variables.
 
How do you post the attachments that are up right away? Also, on my pc they do not need to be rotated for whatever reason when they uploaded it turned them sorry.

a) i have written .1 pi (.01)^2 in the denominator
Thank you, and dually noted
 
ilovetswift said:
How do you post the attachments that are up right away?
Sorry, I don't know what the magic is there. I've never run into the problem, but I see you're not alone. Some come out 180 degrees out. Sounds like a landscape/portrait mix-up.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top