Initial electric field strength

AI Thread Summary
The initial electric field strength between oppositely charged parallel plates is 3.0 X 10^3 N/C. When half the charge is removed and the plate separation decreases from 12 mm to 8 mm, the expected electric field strength calculation leads to confusion. The correct approach involves using the surface charge density formula, E = n/ε₀, rather than the point charge equation. The final calculated electric field strength is 1.5 X 10^3 N/C, highlighting the importance of using the appropriate equations for parallel plate capacitors. Understanding the distinction between point charge and parallel plate equations is crucial for accurate calculations.
ralph344
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The initial electric field strength between oppositely charged parallel plates is 3.0 X 10^3 N/C, what would the electric field strength become if half of the charge were removed from each plate and the separation of the plates were changed from 12 mm to 8 mm?

Homework Equations


E= kq/r^2
k=9.0 X 10^9


The Attempt at a Solution


I used proportions.
Since the formula is E=kq/r^2, i rearranged the formula to Er^2/q = k. Since the k value is going to stay constant for both.
Er^2/q = Er^2/q
[(3.0 X 10^3)(0.012)^2]/q=[E(0.008)^2]/[0.5q]
E= 3.5 X 10^3 N/C
But the answer is 1.5 X 10^3 N/C...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The electric field equation you state is for a point charge. ( and other limited cases)
 
But that's the only equation taught in this section... there is no other equations... anymore hints?
 
hey! i solved your problem! the equation you are using is that of a point charge like robb said. the electric field strength in a parallel plate capacitor is given by E=n/epsilon zero. n is the surface charge density of the plates which are equal in magnitude. the surface charge density is simply the amount charge on the plates divided by its surface area.
 
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