How to Prove Electric Potential Formula for a Charged Disc?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the electric potential formula for a charged disc, specifically V=2kpisigma(sqrt{x^2+r^2}-x), and its reduction to V=kQ/x when x is much larger than r. A user attempted to manipulate the formula by multiplying by a fraction to simplify it but expressed uncertainty about the correctness of their approach. They suggested considering a differential ring on the charged plate to find the charge it possesses and using integration to derive the potential at a distance 'x' from the disc. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the potential due to a differential charge and integrating over the disc's radius to arrive at the desired expression.
sheepcountme
Messages
80
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



I need to prove that the formula for electric potential (V) of a charged disc (with radius r) and with a uniform charge density, that
V=2kpisigma\(sqrt{x^2+r^2}-x)

when x is very large compared to r, and Q is the total charge of the disk, that this formula reduces to V=kQ/x

Homework Equations



Shown above

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried multiplying by a fraction of (sqrt{x^2+r^2}+x) as both numer and denom, and worked through it to get V=2kpisigma(4xsqrt{x^2+r^2})/(sqrt{x^2+r^2}+x)

Here I assumed that all under the square root was approaching x, so simplified as

V=kpisigma4x^2/x

But now I don't know if I've been doing this right..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a differential ring in the charged plate, with a radius say 'r' and thickness say 'dr', then what charge does it posses?
Assuming the surface charge density to be sigma, you can find the charge covered by the differential ring. Now you must know the formula for the potential at a point due to a ring (on the axis). If you know that, then you can find the potential at the required point (at a distance 'x' as per your question) due to the differential ring. It will be only in terms of a single differential, 'dr'. Just integrate it from r=0 to r=R (where i am assuming R to be the radius of the plate), you will have the required expression!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top