Is the Electric Field Normal to the Surface?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the assumption that the electric field is normal to the surface of a long, non-conducting cylinder with a non-uniform charge density of Ar^2. The confusion arises from the lack of explicit justification for this assumption, as the electric field could theoretically have a different orientation. However, it is clarified that symmetry plays a crucial role; for a long cylinder with uniform symmetry, the electric field can indeed be considered normal to the surface. If the cylinder were finite or the charge distribution varied with height or angle, this assumption would not hold. Ultimately, the cylindrical symmetry allows for the simplification needed to solve the problem effectively.
auk411
Messages
54
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let's say you have a solid cylinder. It is nonconducting. It is long enough such that the contributions from the ends are negligible. It has a non-uniform volume charge density of Ar^2, where A is some positive constant. Then you are asked to find the electric field at different radii, respectively.

This is a problem that I was given as homework. What confuses me is that the authors assume that the Flux, F, = E(Surface Area of curved area). That is, F = E2\piRH, where H is the height of the cylinder. Typically, this I have no problems with this; I understand what is going on (typically). However, in this case I see nothing in the problem that warrants the assumption that the flux can be rewritten as F=Ecos(0)2\piRH. Am I missing something here? Couldn't the Electric field be written as <x,y,z>. In which case, the the angle between the Electric field and the normal vector pointing out from the surface would NOT be 0. Thus, making the assumption false.

Is it the case that anytime you have a gaussian surface that is a cylinder, the Electric field will always be parallel to any normal vector to the surface. Or is there something in the problem that warrants the assumption that this is true?

Btw, the problem only contains the following information: that is a cylinder, it is really long, it has a non-uniform charge density = Ar^2. A = 2.5\mu C/m^5, the radius of the cylinder is .04 m. And we are to find the electric field at r = 3 cm and r = 5 cm.

Given that I make the assumption that the angle between E (vector, not magnitude) and a normal vector to the (curved) surface is 0, I can solve the problem. However, I can't find any reason to make the assumption.

Any explanation would be great.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You are right, nothing ensures that the electric field is normal to the surface of the cylinder, but symmetry. If the cylinder had finite length, it would not be true. If the charge distribution depended on height or the azimuthal angle, it would not be right.
If it was a metal surface, the electric field would be normal to the surface as the electric field is the negative gradient of the potential, and a metal surface is a equipotential surface (in the static case). This cylinder is not from metal, but both the geometry and the charge distribution has the cylindrical symmetry. With this assumption, you can find a solution which fulfils the Maxwell equations, and as the solutions of these equations are unique, this is the solution.

ehild
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top