How Do Electric Fields Behave Around Concentric Charged Spherical Shells?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field around two concentric charged spherical shells, with charge Q on the inner shell and -Q on the outer shell. For the region inside the smaller shell, the electric field is zero due to the absence of enclosed charge. Between the shells, the electric field is derived as E = kQ/(πr^2), while outside the larger shell, the field can be computed by enclosing both shells. The method involves using Gaussian surfaces, with the inner shell's field being zero and the outer shell's field accounting for the total enclosed charge. The symmetry of the system allows for consistent application of Gauss's law across different regions.
ibaraku
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Two concentric plastic spherical shells carry uniformly distributed charges, Q on the inner shell and -Q on the outer shell. Find the electric field (a)Inside the smaller shell, (b)between the shells, and (c) outside the larger shell

Homework Equations



integration(E * n)dA = (4pi) (k) (Qenclosed)

The Attempt at a Solution



In order to get hteh electric field between the shells, we can say that

[abs(E) * abs(n) cos delta](4pi) r^2 = (4pi) (k) (Qenclosed)

and working out the algebra it comes out to be

E = kQ/pi r^2

but what about for the charge outside the larger shell and the charge inside the smaller charge?
Is it safe to say that the we need to divide by 2 for the smaller shell and multiply by 2 for the large shell?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ibaraku said:
[abs(E) * abs(n) cos delta](4pi) r^2 = (4pi) (k) (Qenclosed)

and working out the algebra it comes out to be

E = kQ/pi r^2
Yes that's right.
ibaraku said:
but what about for the charge outside the larger shell and the charge inside the smaller charge?
Is it safe to say that the we need to divide by 2 for the smaller shell and multiply by 2 for the large shell?
Thanks
You do this the same way as you did the above, except now the Gaussian surface for (a) cuts through the smaller sphere, and in (c) the Gaussian surface encloses both spheres. There isn't any way you can use the result obtained above to compute for the other two cases. The method used is still valid, though because of symmetry.
 
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