How Does Gauss' Law Apply to Nested Spherical Surfaces with Varying Radii?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the application of Gauss' Law to nested spherical surfaces with varying radii, specifically analyzing the mathematical implications of charge distribution within a sphere of density ρ(r) from 0 to radius R. The participants clarify that when considering a smaller sphere (radius R1) and a larger sphere (radius R2), the total charge should be calculated as the integral of the charge density over the volume between R1 and R2. A critical point raised is the direction of the normal vector for the surface integrals, which affects the calculation of the electric field and total charge. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of correctly orienting the surface vectors to avoid discrepancies in the results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gauss' Law in electrostatics
  • Familiarity with surface integrals and vector calculus
  • Knowledge of charge density functions and their integration
  • Concept of electric fields and their relation to charge distributions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Gauss' Law in non-uniform charge distributions
  • Learn about surface integrals in vector calculus
  • Explore the concept of electric field direction and its significance in electrostatics
  • Investigate common mistakes in applying Gauss' Law to complex geometries
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those specializing in electromagnetism, as well as educators looking to clarify concepts related to Gauss' Law and electric fields in nested spherical systems.

elis02
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Lets suppose we have a sphere.
This sphere has density of [itex]\rho[/itex](r) from 0 to the sphere's final radius R.

Now, we all know that from Gauss law, the charge inside the sphere equals to the integral of the surface of the sphere.
If we set our normal vector to be as usual out of the sphere and our surface is the sphere than we have of course Qtot which is integral on the total volume.

But, let me ask you guys something else. what if our surface is a smaller sphere with radius R1 (let's symbol it S') and bigger sphere with radius R2, we'll symbol it S.
the total charge should be [itex]\int\rho[/itex](r)dv from R1 to R2
but how about the surface integral? I mean integral on the Surface is integral on S plus integral on S'.
now, if the normal to the surface is out of the surface what we get is ∫Eds+∫Eds'=Qtot+[itex]\int\rho[/itex](r)dv from 0 to R1.
yes, something is wrong here. can you tell what is it and explain?

* We all can solve it in another way, but that's not what I'm looking for. just want you guys to tell me if you see something wrong with the mathematics here... (I think I know the problem but wanted to be sure about it - I believe that if the field is outside you should say the surface vector is on the other direction, meaning the surface vector of the inner sphere is the opposite of the outer sphere)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"Outwards" in your case means "towards r=0" in the inner surface (it is out of the enclosed volume of your surface). You will get Q minus the charge in the innermost region if you do the surface integral properly.
 
my following question

thanks.
So now I can continue to my following question (the real purpose of the thread)
it's attached as pdf file.
Edit: I got it. the professor did some mistakes with the directions of the surface vectors. said one thing and did another...
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K