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

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of Gauss' Law to nested spherical surfaces with varying radii. The user explores the implications of integrating charge density over different spherical volumes and questions the correctness of surface integrals when considering the direction of normal vectors. They identify a potential error in the treatment of surface vectors, suggesting that the direction of the inner sphere's vector should be opposite to that of the outer sphere. Ultimately, the user concludes that the professor made mistakes regarding the direction of these surface vectors. The conversation emphasizes the importance of accurately defining vector directions in applying Gauss' Law.
elis02
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Lets suppose we have a sphere.
This sphere has density of \rho(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 \int\rho(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+\int\rho(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:
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
Back
Top