How to Determine the Electric Potential Difference in a Coaxial Cable?

dancer18
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Physics 2 coaxial potential help!

https://wug-s.physics.uiuc.edu/cgi/courses/shell/common/showme.pl?cc/DuPage/phys2112/summer/homework/Ch-22-E-Potential/IE_cylindersV/coax.gif

The diagram above shows a coaxial cable. The inner conductor has radius a = 0.0025 m. The outer conductor is a cylindrical shell with inner radius b = 0.0075 m, and outer radius c = 0.008 m from the center. Both conductors are coaxial. For every length L = 10 m of cable, there is a total charge q = 2.8e-008 C on the inner conductor and a total charge of Q = -5.6e-006 C on the outer conductor.

Determine the electric potential difference between the labeled points A and B.

PLEASE 've been working on this problem for about THREE hours, and I still can't get it! I'm so confused. Please please please!

I tried using the voltage equations from c to b and then adding it w/the voltage from b to a. and it's wrong!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


I think you may find first E for r>=c.
Please use Gauss law.
Integral of E from r=c to infinity will give potential at r=c.
Use the condition that potential at infinity = 0.
Go the same way to the center.
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top