Given potential, ask plane charge distribution

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the charge distribution on the xy-plane given a specific electric potential above it. The potential is expressed as φ = φ_0 exp(-kz) cos(kx), leading to the derived electric field components E_x and E_z. A charge distribution σ_z can be calculated to produce E_z, but the participants are uncertain about how to derive σ_x for E_x. The conversation suggests that the periodic nature of the potential implies a specific charge distribution, and there is consideration of non-uniform charge distributions affecting the electric field's behavior. Ultimately, the focus remains on finding a suitable charge distribution that aligns with the given potential and electric field characteristics.
Tekk
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



All charges in space are distributed on the xy-plane. The potential above the plane is known as
\phi = \phi_0 exp(-kz) cos(kx)

What's the charge distribution on xy-plane?

Homework Equations



\vec E =- grad(\phi)

The Attempt at a Solution



Applying the relationship between \vec E and \phi, I have found:

E_x = k \phi_0 exp(-kz) sin(kx)
E_z = k \phi_0 exp(-kz) cos(kx)

I know that a charge distribution \sigma_z = \frac{E_z}{2\pi} would produce E_z. But how about E_x?
I am thinking of a superposition of \sigma_z and \sigma_x to produce \vec E. So the question now is to find \sigma_x: what kind of charge distribution on the plane would produce E_x = k \phi_0 exp(-kz) sin(kx)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see how a constant charge density would lead to the cosine term (or even the exponential).

Your potential is periodic in x and does not depend on y, what do you expect for the charge distribution?
Does this problem appear in the context of Fourier transformations?
 
mfb said:
I don't see how a constant charge density would lead to the cosine term (or even the exponential).

Your potential is periodic in x and does not depend on y, what do you expect for the charge distribution?
Does this problem appear in the context of Fourier transformations?

No, the problem is not appeared in the context of Fourier transformation. It is the problem 31(c) from Chapter 2: Electric Potential of Purcell 2ed E&M textbook. Purcell asks us to describe the charge distribution on the non-conducting flat sheet.

I neither see how a charge distribution would lead to an exponential decay along the z-axis. But what if the charge is not uniformly distributed in the plane? Specifically, let the charge only distributed on a finite circle, then the electric field at least decay along the z-axis. My reason is: in the very far, we could treat this circle as a point charge, so the electric field it produce would decay.

If we temporary don't care the electrical field far away and focus only on the location very near to the xy-plane, in that case, z approaches to zero, E_z = kϕ_0cos(kx). I can find a charge distribution \sigma_z = \frac{E_z}{2\pi} = \frac{kϕ_0}{2\pi}cos(kx) to produce E_z, at least when z is very small. But I have no idea how to find \sigma_x to produce E_x. Do you have any suggestion. A qualitative approach is welcome.
 
Tekk said:
so the electric field it produce would decay.
But not exponentially.
The approach with very small z could work. Can you calculate Ez for all z based on this charge distribution?

I think if one fits, the other one will fit as well, so I would not worry about Ex for now.
 
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