Is My Equation for Finding Electric Potential in the Correct Form?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the formulation of an equation for calculating electric potential due to a charged disk. The original poster presents an equation and expresses uncertainty about its correctness, particularly regarding a specific term in the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the validity of the original equation, specifically the inclusion of the '-z' term. There is a suggestion to verify the relevant equation and consider the geometry of the problem.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on adjusting the equation and suggested that the original poster should consider the integration process to confirm the terms involved. Multiple interpretations of the equation's components are being explored.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of confusion regarding the variables used in the problem, particularly the different radii involved and their implications for setting up the integral. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in defining these variables.

VitaX
Messages
183
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



mwqgxt.jpg


Homework Equations



V = (sigma)/(2*epsilon_0)*((z^2 + R^2)^(1/2) - z)

The Attempt at a Solution



This was my full equation to find the total electric potential:

V = (sigma)/(2*epsilon_0)*((z^2 + R^2)^(1/2) - z) - (sigma)/(2*epsilon_0)*((z^2 + r^2)^(1/2) - z)

But I got the answer wrong. Is this equation even correct here? I'm not seeing what I did wrong if it is the right equation to use.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that you may want to verify your "Relevant equation". That "-z" term looks suspicious. How did you find this equation?
 
gneill said:
I think that you may want to verify your "Relevant equation". That "-z" term looks suspicious. How did you find this equation?

2rf8u4k.png
 
Ah. The 'z' results from the disk going from radius 0 to radius R. Your disk has a minimum radius that is not zero, so rather than a 'z' term there should be another sqrt(z2 + r2) in its place, where r is the inner radius of the ring.
 
gneill said:
Ah. The 'z' results from the disk going from radius 0 to radius R. Your disk has a minimum radius that is not zero, so rather than a 'z' term there should be another sqrt(z2 + r2) in its place, where r is the inner radius of the ring.

I see, so if I do that it will complete the equation needed to solve this?
 
That should do it, but it might be preferable for you to do the integration and confirm where the term comes from. You might have to do something similar in an exam at some point.
 
True, I know I start with dV = (1/4*pi*e_0) \integral (dQ/r)

Next step would be to say dQ = sigma*dx where sigma = Q/Area. Do I use Area = 4*pi*R^2 here? I'm a bit confused as to how about going to set this up and where the R and r come into play.
 
Yes, it gets a bit confusing because there are so many different r's floating around in this problem. Rename some. Call the distance from a given ring of charge to the point on the z-axis d. That takes the place of the r in the \integral (dQ/r), and is given by sqrt(z2 + x2), where here x is the radius of the given differential ring of charge. The integration limits will be x = r to x = R, corresponding to the radial extremes of the disk.

Have a look http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/potlin.html" for the geometry and setup of the integral.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
786
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K