How Does a Fly Navigate Between Capacitor Plates?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the behavior of a fly navigating between capacitor plates, specifically focusing on equipotential lines and surfaces. Participants are exploring the implications of symmetry in the electric field and potential within the capacitor's geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to interpret the nature of equipotential lines and their relationship to the fly's path. Questions about the symmetry of the problem and the potential's behavior at various points are raised, along with considerations of how to set up equations for potential calculation.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the equipotential surfaces and their characteristics. Some participants have suggested considering the potential explicitly and using symmetry to simplify calculations. Multiple interpretations of the problem setup are being discussed, with no clear consensus yet on the approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating constraints related to the geometry of the capacitor plates and the assumptions about the electric field. There are mentions of approximations and the need to express variables in terms of given parameters, indicating a complex relationship between the elements involved.

  • #31
ehild said:
Very far away from the capacitor the plates are small with respect to the distance so they can be treated as point charges. Determine how the potential depends on the distance from the central point.

The expression for the potential outside is mentioned above by haruspex.
For large x, the expression approximates to:
V=2\pi k \sigma d
\Rightarrow V=\frac{\sigma d}{2 \epsilon_0}

Have I approximated the expression correctly?

ehild said:
See picture. The fly starts at P and reaches P' on the equipotential.
By the way, you had the electric field between the plates correctly in post #21. What is the potential at the point εd/2 distance from the centre, if you take the zero of the potential at the central point? You can even omit the d/R term.

So the electric field in the middle region can be approximated to ##\displaystyle \frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_0}##?

The potential at the point εd/2 distance from the centre is ##\displaystyle \frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_0}\cdot \frac{d\epsilon}{2}##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Pranav-Arora said:
The expression for the potential outside is mentioned above by haruspex.
For large x, the expression approximates to:
V=2\pi k \sigma d
\Rightarrow V=\frac{\sigma d}{2 \epsilon_0}

Have I approximated the expression correctly?

No, it must depend (decrease) with the distance from the capacitor.

Pranav-Arora said:
So the electric field in the middle region can be approximated to ##\displaystyle \frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_0}##?

The potential at the point εd/2 distance from the centre is ##\displaystyle \frac{\sigma}{\epsilon_0}\cdot \frac{d\epsilon}{2}##

That is correct.


ehild
 
  • #33
ehild said:
No, it must depend (decrease) with the distance from the capacitor.

I am not sure how would I approximate the following surd. :confused:
\sqrt{\left(x-\frac{d}{2}\right)^2+R^2}=\sqrt{x^2+\frac{d^2}{4}-xd+R^2}

I guess I can drop the d^2/4 term but what should I do after that?
 
  • #34
\sqrt{x^2+\frac{d^2}{4}-xd+R^2}=\sqrt{x^2+R^2+<br /> d^2/4}\sqrt{1-\frac{xd}{x^2+R^2+<br /> d^2/4}}...

ehild
 
  • #35
ehild said:
\sqrt{x^2+\frac{d^2}{4}-xd+R^2}=\sqrt{x^2+R^2+<br /> d^2/4}\sqrt{1-\frac{xd}{x^2+R^2+<br /> d^2/4}}...

ehild

\sqrt{x^2+R^2+d^2/4}\sqrt{1-\frac{xd}{x^2+R^2+d^2/4}}=\sqrt{x^2+R^2+d^2/4}\left(1-\frac{xd}{2(x^2+R^2+d^2/4)}\right)

Similarly, the other surd can be simplified.
I end up with the following expression for the potential:
V=2\pi k \sigma d \left(1-\frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+R^2+d^2/4}}\right)

Is this correct?

EDIT: Looks like I have got the right answer. Equating the above expression for ##\frac{\sigma d \epsilon}{2 \epsilon_0}## and plugging in the values of d and R, I get the right answer which is 21.215.

Thanks a lot for the help everyone! :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #36
Pranav-Arora said:
EDIT: Looks like I have got the right answer. Equating the above expression for ##\frac{\sigma d \epsilon}{2 \epsilon_0}## and plugging in the values of d and R, I get the right answer which is 21.215.

Thanks a lot for the help everyone! :smile:

Very good!

Try also the method I outlined in #30. Just for fun :)

ehild
 
  • #37
ehild said:
Try also the method I outlined in #30. Just for fun :)

That's the method I used to solve the problem. Are you talking about #29?
 
  • #38
Pranav-Arora said:
That's the method I used to solve the problem. Are you talking about #29?

No it was #30. Approximating the field far away as that of two points charges.


ehild
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
984
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K