How Does an External Charge Affect Flux Through a Cube's Face?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jd12345
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cube Flux
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effect of an external charge on the electric flux through a face of a cube that contains another charge at its center. Participants explore the implications of charge placement, symmetry, and the nature of the cube (whether it is a conductor) on the flux calculation. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and mathematical reasoning related to electric fields and flux density.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the flux through the whole cube remains unchanged at q/ε, but questions how to proceed with the external charge affecting the flux through face ABCD.
  • Another participant suggests that the external charge could be treated as if another cube were present, hinting at a potential simplification in the problem.
  • There is a discussion about whether the cube is a conductor and how that might influence the flux calculations.
  • Some participants argue that the flux due to the inner charge should still be Q/6ε, while others contest this by stating that the external charge alters the electric field lines, leading to non-uniform flux across the faces.
  • One participant proposes that if the charges are of the same sign, the flux through the face might be zero due to reflective symmetry, while another counters that the lack of symmetry in the problem complicates this assumption.
  • There is mention of the potential for negative charge accumulation on the face ABCD, which could contribute to a non-zero flux.
  • A participant states that the answer provided in their text indicates the flux is zero, prompting further inquiry into the reasoning behind this conclusion.
  • Another participant suggests that electromagnetic fields do not interact and can be treated separately, allowing for the addition of individual electric fields or fluxes from each charge.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the impact of the external charge on the flux through the cube's face. Some believe that the inner charge's contribution remains symmetric, while others argue that the external charge disrupts this symmetry. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the exact nature of the flux through the face.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of assumptions regarding the nature of the cube (conductor vs. non-conductor) and the arrangement of charges, which may influence the calculations and interpretations of flux. There are also references to the mathematical treatment of electric fields and potential, indicating that the problem may require careful consideration of boundary conditions.

jd12345
Messages
251
Reaction score
2
A charge q is kept at the centre O of cube of length L(ABCDEF). Another charge q is kept at a distacne L from the centre O. Find the flux through face ABCD

Well the flux through whole of the cube will remain unchanged that is q/ε.
But now since we have another charge q outisde the cube we cannot use symmetry and say flux through each face is q/6ε.
I have no idea how to proceed ahead. please help. thank you

since i don't know how to post the image ill just give a description about it :- charge q which is outside the cube is kept such that the face of the cube bisects the distance between the two charges
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi jd12345! :smile:
jd12345 said:
charge q which is outside the cube is kept such that the face of the cube bisects the distance between the two charges

just as if another cube was there! :biggrin:
 
lol yeah - it could be written in that way too
I always make things more complicated - damn it
 
jd12345 said:
lol yeah - it could be written in that way too
I always make things more complicated - damn it

Is the cube a conductor? If yes, is it grounded?
 
Isn't there more to tiny-tim's post than an alternative description of the set-up? Isn't he hinting at how the problem is solved – in a single line? [Think about what the component of E perpendicular to the face at each point will be, by adding the fields due to the individual charges at that point.]

I first misread the question as the charges being equal and opposite. The result is just as easy to find, and at least as interesting.
 
Last edited:
Philip Wood said:
The result is just as easy to find, and at least as interesting.

I haven't figured it out yet. The distribution of the flux density inside the cube is still symmetric due to the box ( which is equi-potential). So the flux due to the inner charge is still Q/6ε. However, determining the flux due to the charge outside the cube doesn't seem to be trivial even if there was no charge in the cube. Any hints please?
 
Hassan2 said:
So the flux due to the inner charge is still Q/6ε.

i don't think flux due to inner charge will be Q/6ε. The charge outisde will alter the electric field lines of the inner charge and hence electric field on all the faces will not be the same - so flux not same on all faces

But i still cannot solve the problem. Do i imagine another cube as tiny-tim hinted? How will that help?
 
IF the charges are the same sign, shouldn't the flux through the face be zero due to reflective symmetry about the cube face ABCD?
 
jd12345 said:
i don't think flux due to inner charge will be Q/6ε.

In a simple language, the box shield the inner charge so that it doesn't feel its existence of the outer charge. Hence the field inside the box is distributed as if there was no charge outside.

Mathematically speaking, the solution of Laplace's equation for potential with a charge in the center and a constant boundary condition on the cube is symmetric.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Sorry didnt tell you before but the answer is given at the back of my text - its zero
any thoughts on why its zero?
 
  • #11
Bipolarity said:
IF the charges are the same sign, shouldn't the flux through the face be zero due to reflective symmetry about the cube face ABCD?

If both charges were in identical cubes, the symmetry would be obvious but the problem doesn't have such a symmetry.

In my opinion, some negative charge of opposite sign of q is accumulated on face ABCD. This makes the flux non-zero.
 
  • #12
jd12345 said:
Sorry didnt tell you before but the answer is given at the back of my text - its zero
any thoughts on why its zero?

Perhaps the cube is not a conductor?!
 
  • #13
hi jd12345! :smile:

(just got up :zzz:)
jd12345 said:
Sorry didnt tell you before but the answer is given at the back of my text - its zero
any thoughts on why its zero?

perhaps you're misreading the queston?

the way i read it, it's only asking for the flux through one face, the common face between the two cubes

from symmetry, one flux will obviously be minus the other! :wink:
The charge outisde will alter the electric field lines of the inner charge

yeees, but it's a lot easier to think of the fields as being completely separate

electromagnetic fields don't interact with each other, they just add

(btw, "shielding" is irrelevant)

so you can always calculate each electric field (or flux) separately, and add them :smile:
 
  • #14
ok thanx
 
  • #15
And for my misreading (thinking the charges were equal and opposite) the flux through the common face is q/3ε0.
 
  • #16
tiny-tim said:
yeees, but it's a lot easier to think of the fields as being completely separate

electromagnetic fields don't interact with each other, they just add

(btw, "shielding" is irrelevant)

so you can always calculate each electric field (or flux) separately, and add them :smile:


Thanks. This makes things easier.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K