How Far Should the Voltmeter Probe Be Placed to Read 195V?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bjonesp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probe Voltmeter
bjonesp
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A very long insulating cylinder of charge of radius 2.70cm carries a uniform linear density of 16.0 nC/m

Question: If you put one probe of a voltmeter at the surface, how far from the surface must the other probe be placed so that the voltmeter reads 195 ?


Relevant equations: The relevant equation for this problem is V=(lamda/2*pi*epsilon nought)*ln(R/r)



The attempt at a solution: For this problem I am trying to find little r in the above equation. 'Lambda' is given in the problem statement as (16*10^-9). To find little r, I first got the ln() function by itself by dividing each side of the equation by 'lambda/...' To save time I have denoted that function by A. So V/A=ln(R/r). I then took the exponential of each side to get ride of the ln() and I am left with r=R/[e^(V/A)]. I do not understand why this is not correct could someone please help me out. Thank you very much
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Be careful about the reference point. If R and r are measured from the central axis of the cylinder, and one is being asked about the distance x from the surface, which is at R, then what is the relationship between r and x?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top