I'm having trouble visualizing the orientation of the equipotential surfaces.

  • Thread starter Thread starter gunitsoldier9
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    equipotential
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the orientation of equipotential surfaces in a uniform electric field of 6700 N/C directed along the negative x-axis. It is established that equipotential surfaces are always perpendicular to the electric field lines. Consequently, the correct orientation is determined to be parallel to the yz-plane, as this is the only plane that maintains perpendicularity to the x-axis. Participants emphasize the importance of visualizing three-dimensional space to fully grasp the concept.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric fields and their properties.
  • Familiarity with the concept of equipotential surfaces.
  • Basic knowledge of three-dimensional geometry.
  • Ability to visualize spatial relationships in physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the relationship between electric fields and equipotential surfaces in detail.
  • Learn about electric field lines and their representation in three dimensions.
  • Explore practical examples of equipotential surfaces in various electric field configurations.
  • Investigate the mathematical equations governing electric fields, such as E=V/r.
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of electric fields and equipotential surfaces.

gunitsoldier9
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider a region in space where a uniform electric field 6700 N/C points in the negative x direction.
What is the orientation of the equipotential surfaces?
a.Parallel to the xz-plane.
b.Parallel to the yz-plane.
c.Parallel to the xy-plane.


Homework Equations



E=V/r

The Attempt at a Solution


Very confusing problem please help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i'll try to rephrase the question:
a continuous, 2 dimensional shape in which of the following planes (a, b, or c) would have an equal potential throughout its entire surface
 
v0id19 said:
i'll try to rephrase the question:
a continuous, 2 dimensional shape in which of the following planes (a, b, or c) would have an equal potential throughout its entire surface

would that make it xy because a z would mean 3 dimensions are involved.
 
There are three dimensions involved.

Remember, an equipotential surface is perpendicular to the electric field--if you draw (or imagine, whichever you find easier) the electric field and define the x-axis, the y-axis and the z-axis, you can find the plane that would always be perpendicular to the field.
 
Hannisch said:
There are three dimensions involved.

Remember, an equipotential surface is perpendicular to the electric field--if you draw (or imagine, whichever you find easier) the electric field and define the x-axis, the y-axis and the z-axis, you can find the plane that would always be perpendicular to the field.

I know that its perpendicular to the eclectic field but it just doesn't make sense if the electric field is on the x-axis i know the equipotential surface would be vertical. but i just don't get what plane it would be parallel to.
 
Yes, it'd be vertical, but remember it has a thickness as well.

A new wording might help: The electric field is along the x-axis. If you have the xy plane, as an example, it would go along the x-axis as well, but with a height or something. If two things go along the same axis, can they ever be perpendicular?
 
Hannisch said:
Yes, it'd be vertical, but remember it has a thickness as well.

A new wording might help: The electric field is along the x-axis. If you have the xy plane, as an example, it would go along the x-axis as well, but with a height or something. If two things go along the same axis, can they ever be perpendicular?

no they cant. so does that rule out the xy plane
 
Yes, because something going along the same axis as another thing will never be perpendicular to each other. Hopefully you see why precisely it's ruled out. Try to use the same logic with the other alternatives and you might come up with the correct answer. But try to really understand what you are doing!
 
Hannisch said:
Yes, because something going along the same axis as another thing will never be perpendicular to each other. Hopefully you see why precisely it's ruled out. Try to use the same logic with the other alternatives and you might come up with the correct answer. But try to really understand what you are doing!

i think its yz. its really hard to visualize the plane in 3 dimensions and my book doesn't even talk about 3 dimensions for that equipential surfaces
 
  • #10
Three dimensions isn't the easiest thing to imagine and it's not the easiest thing to write either. You are correct in that it's the yz plane.

Try to think of it like this or something:

Use a piece of cardboard or something similar--if you put it on the table on the edge and it's facing you, you have a xy plane. If you lie it down on the table you have a xz plane. If you put it on the edge again but with the thin side facing you, that's a yz plane.

Or sort of just think of the z-axis to come out of the paper or something.

And electric fields always exist in three dimensions. If you have a field around a point charge you only draw the field lines parallel to the paper, but you sort of have to imagine that there are field lines going up from the paper and down through the table as well, because the field isn't only limited to going in the two dimensions you can draw (easily).

Therefore, equipotential surfaces also have to exist in three dimensions, right? :)
 
  • #11
Hannisch said:
Three dimensions isn't the easiest thing to imagine and it's not the easiest thing to write either. You are correct in that it's the yz plane.

Try to think of it like this or something:

Use a piece of cardboard or something similar--if you put it on the table on the edge and it's facing you, you have a xy plane. If you lie it down on the table you have a xz plane. If you put it on the edge again but with the thin side facing you, that's a yz plane.

Or sort of just think of the z-axis to come out of the paper or something.

And electric fields always exist in three dimensions. If you have a field around a point charge you only draw the field lines parallel to the paper, but you sort of have to imagine that there are field lines going up from the paper and down through the table as well, because the field isn't only limited to going in the two dimensions you can draw (easily).

Therefore, equipotential surfaces also have to exist in three dimensions, right? :)

Yeah thanks. I wish that they would actually draw a picture in the book and point it out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K