How Does Gauss's Law Apply to the Flux Through a Cube Near a Charged Sphere?

  • Thread starter Thread starter physicsstooge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cube Flux
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the total flux through a cube located near a charged sphere, specifically applying Gauss's Law. The cube is empty, and the charge of the sphere is given as 3.00 coulombs.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the meaning of "total flux" and whether it refers to net flux. There is consideration of how to apply Gauss's Law in this context and questions about the implications of the cube being empty.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the application of Gauss's Law, noting that the net flux through the cube must be zero due to the absence of charge within it. There is an exploration of the potential confusion surrounding the external electric field and its relevance to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the lack of information regarding the orientation of the cube in relation to the external field, which may affect the interpretation of the problem.

physicsstooge
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have the homework problem below with which I'm totally stumped. Can anyone out there help me out?

A small cube of volume 9.0 cm^3 is 0.30 cm from a metal sphere that has charge 3.00 coulombs. If the cube is empty, what is the total flux through it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider Gauss's law.
 
By "total flux", do you mean "net flux"? Like how much is leaving the cubical volume, versus how much is entering it? What do you think the answer is?
 
"Consider Gauss's law."

I suppose the setup in this particular case that is confusing me. I'm probably making it harder than what it needs to be. I instinctively want to say it's the E * the Area of the cube, but that's not right.
 
physicsstooge said:
"Consider Gauss's law."

I suppose the setup in this particular case that is confusing me. I'm probably making it harder than what it needs to be. I instinctively want to say it's the E * the Area of the cube, but that's not right.

You can calculate the flux through each one of the 6 sides of the cube that way. Did you re-check the question to see if it is talking about the net flux? What do they mean by "total" flux?
 
physicsstooge said:
I instinctively want to say it's the E * the Area of the cube, but that's not right.
That's pretty close. More precisely, the net flux through the cube is the sum of \vec{E}\cdot\vec{A} over the entire surface of the cube. What does Gauss's law tell you about the net flux through some volume?
 
"What does Gauss's law tell you about the net flux through some volume?"


Sum should be zero. I knew I was making it harder than it was. Thanks guys
 
Right! As long as the cube is empty (no charge inside), the net flux must be zero.
 
physicsstooge said:
"What does Gauss's law tell you about the net flux through some volume?"


Sum should be zero. I knew I was making it harder than it was.

I'll just mention that some version of this problem is a favorite (often multiple-choice) exam question *precisely* because students may think that the external field is somehow important. The configuration of that field is often chosen to make calculating the flux through each surface of the cube very complicated. Thus, many students in desperation will select a choice thinking that there's supposed to be some clever way to do the flux integral, *rather* than realizing that they just want to apply Gauss' Law.

Just as a way to "psyche-out" such questions (related to useful approaches in physics problem solving generally), notice that nothing is said about the *orientation* of this cube in the external field of the charged sphere. (There's nothing in the statement of the problem that allows you to *assume* any symmetry.) How could these details *not* matter in finding the net flux? Only if the answer were the one where the external field didn't matter: zero.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
9K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K