How did they integrate the charge for Voltage question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on integrating to find the potential for a disc of charge, specifically addressing confusion about the integral involving R' and its disappearance in the calculation. It is clarified that the integral is not simply R'dR' due to the presence of the denominator, which includes √(z² + R'²). A u-substitution (u = z² + R'²) is suggested to aid in solving the integral. Participants emphasize the importance of understanding the assumptions about the variables involved to simplify the problem. The conversation highlights the challenges of using software like Mathematica for such integrals without clear assumptions.
kiwibird4
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I have a question on finding potential for a disc of charge when it comes to the simple integration
upload_2016-2-2_0-18-39.png

how does the integral of R'dR'/etc have the R'dR' just disappear? i thought it would then be R^2/2
I am obviously missing something here
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi kiwibird4. Please remember to use the formatting template for all questions posted in the homework section.

The integral in question is not simply of R'dR'. Note that the denominator contains ##\sqrt{z^2 + R'^2}##.
 
kiwibird4 said:
I have a question on finding potential for a disc of charge when it comes to the simple integration
View attachment 95177
how does the integral of R'dR'/etc have the R'dR' just disappear? i thought it would then be R^2/2
I am obviously missing something here
u-substitution ##u = z^2+R'^2## is applied.
 
gneill said:
Hi kiwibird4. Please remember to use the formatting template for all questions posted in the homework section.

The integral in question is not simply of R'dR'. Note that the denominator contains ##\sqrt{z^2 + R'^2}##.

I'm SORRYYYY :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::H:H:H:H:H:H:H:H
I even had to check the lil button that said -I have followed the homework format
:cry:
 
kiwibird4 said:
I'm SORRYYYY :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::H:H:H:H:H:H:H:H
I even had to check the lil button that said -I have followed the homework format
:cry:
Somehow we must all struggle through this great tragedy and believe in the promise of a brighter tomorrow :smile:

Cheers.
 
Assuming you have looked up this integral in tables of same, I think what you're missing is the assumptions about the variables and z that would make the problem trivial if only you knew what they are. Even if you have success using the methods others have suggested earlier, looking for assumptions is a useful exercise that can pay off later on...

As an aside, it took me a while to get Mathematica to solve your integral. The evaluation hung up until I specified the assumptions required to give an unambiguous answer (The same one, even!). MMA's both interesting and frustrating that way. In order to be as general as possible, it makes few assumptions but provides the user with methods to specify them.
 
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