I don't understand an assumption the textbook made ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter twotaileddemon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Textbook
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the assumption made in Griffith's electrodynamics textbook regarding the image charge method for a point charge near a grounded conducting sphere. The key point is the introduction of an image charge q' that ensures the potential at the sphere's surface is zero, which is crucial for solving the problem. Participants clarify that the position and magnitude of q' are determined to maintain the boundary conditions of the potential. The method of images is emphasized as a useful technique, but it may require adjustments if a single image charge does not suffice. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that the potential remains consistent with the physical constraints of the problem.
twotaileddemon
Messages
258
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



It comes from example 3.2 in griffith's 3rd edition electrodynamics book

A point charge q is situated a distance a from the center of a grounded conducting sphere of radius R. Find the potential outside the sphere.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



I can follow the example, but it assumes that there is another point charge q' = -(R/a) * q, where q' is a distance b from the center (b = R^2/a) and q is a distance a from the center or a distance a-b from q'

My question is... where does it get such an assumption? Or, how does one know to chose such an arbitrary expression? I'm mostly interested in the relationship between the two charges... and how the charge q' (on the inside) is determined.

Thanks for your help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually Griffiths does explain that, at the bottom of that page (the paragraph below (3.18)). You can try the method he explains: take any charge q' at any position x' and calculate the resulting potential, and see which q' and x' to choose to recover (3.17) or (3.19).

Usually, if the location of the image charge is not obvious from the problem, a hint will be given. If you have any arbitrary problem, first try with a single image charge, and check if it does the job. If not, you can go further but probably the method of images isn't such a good idea at all.
 
So I should calculate the potential between q and q'...

ok, I get that.
But even if the potential is given, if I integrated using the equation V = -I(E.dl) where I is integral E is the electric field and . is the dot product, would I get the same result for V?

and once I get the potential.. since the sphere is grounded.. I can set it equal to zero and solve for q' in terms of q?
 
I don't really get what you are asking, sorry.
You have one point charge given, and the potential at the boundaries of some area of space (namely, at the surface of the sphere and at infinity). The idea is that you replace the sphere by one (or more) charge(s) outside that region (in this case, inside the sphere) in such a way that the potential on the boundary and charge distributions inside the region are unchanged. Then the potential and derived quantities (such as the electric field) are the same in the original and new case.

So in this case, you would replace the sphere with a charge q' somewhere inside the region where the sphere was, and calculate the position and magnitude of q' such that the potentials of q and q' together vanish at distance R from the origin.
 
okay, I understand it now. thanks very much :)
 
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