Is the Electric Field Zero Inside Any Shape of an Empty Cavity in a Conductor?

hisashiburi
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The electric field inside an empty cavity in a conductor is zero. Is this statement true no matter what the shape of the cavity? Why or why not?


Homework Equations


Electric field equation. E = kQ / R^2


The Attempt at a Solution


I can't seem to figure out if this is true no matter what the shape.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
no, consider a charge in a cavity in a conductor.

it's only in the meat of the conductor, because when you would put a conductor in a field, the electrons would move and create a field with the protons on their own. The two fields tend to cancel. But in a hole, you don't have this problem. (The edges of the conductor will be charged however, in that case.)
 
jacobrhcp said:
no, consider a charge in a cavity in a conductor.

it's only in the meat of the conductor, because when you would put a conductor in a field, the electrons would move and create a field with the protons on their own. The two fields tend to cancel. But in a hole, you don't have this problem. (The edges of the conductor will be charged however, in that case.)

That's correct, but it's stated that the cavity is empty, so it doesn't contain a charge. There's no net charge density in the conductor and the cavity is empty, so the only place a charge could be is on the surface of the cavity. Now consider a gaussian surface around the cavity but inside the conductor.
 
oh I'm sorry, ah well... I guess Dick gave you quite a hint there.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top