Is There a Potential Difference Across the Inner and Outer Walls of a Conductor?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the potential difference between the inner and outer walls of a conductor with a cavity containing a +3q charge and a uniformly distributed +7q charge on the conductor. It is established that the electric field inside the conductor is zero due to Gauss's law, leading to a constant potential within the conductor. However, participants debate whether a potential difference exists between the inner and outer walls, considering the charge distribution on each surface. Some argue that static charges should not create a potential difference, as charges redistribute to maintain uniform potential across the conductor's surface. The conversation highlights the complexities of charge density and distribution in relation to potential differences in conductive materials.
Juggernaut
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Assume we have cavity in conductor. In the cavity we have +3q charge and conductor charge is distributed uniformly and is +7q.
With Gaus law we now that E=0 inside the conductor becaus Q enclosed is 0. But I have been wondering is there potential difference from inner wall to outer wall of conductor?
There is -3q in the inner wall and +4 outer wall and inside conductor E=0 so V= constant but is there potential leap between inner and outer wall?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Juggernaut said:

Homework Statement



Assume we have cavity in conductor. In the cavity we have +3q charge and conductor charge is distributed uniformly and is +7q.
With Gaus law we now that E=0 inside the conductor becaus Q enclosed is 0. But I have been wondering is there potential difference from inner wall to outer wall of conductor?
There is -3q in the inner wall and +4 outer wall and inside conductor E=0 so V= constant but is there potential leap between inner and outer wall?
What makes you say that there is a potential difference?
 
I can't help with this, but I am trying to picture it. The charge distribution on the outside of a block of aluminium I can visualize. And I can picture a hole being drilled into the block. But how are you going to keep those 3q charges inside the hole? It's a conductor, so they will succeed in migrating to the outside and distributing themselves apart from the others.

These are static charges? Then I think there can be no potential difference between any two points on the conductor; the charges are free to move to reposition themselves so that all points on the surface of the conductor are at a uniform potential.
 
NascentOxygen said:
I can't help with this, but I am trying to picture it. The charge distribution on the outside of a block of aluminium I can visualize. And I can picture a hole being drilled into the block. But how are you going to keep those 3q charges inside the hole? It's a conductor, so they will succeed in migrating to the outside and distributing themselves apart from the others.
It is not only the actual charge that is important, but the charge density on each surface. The outer surface is naturally larger and thus will require a greater total charge in order to have the same charge density as the inner surface, thus maintaining a zero field inside the conductor.
 
well asume the conductor is spherical, and there's sphrical cavity in it. charge +3q in its origo, inner wall of conductor is 0-->a and outer wall is 0-->b.well if u draw Gaussian surface around the charge in the cavity then E is not zero, r<a, then there`d be potential difference inside the cavity, but if u draw GS a<r<b there's not. So I am thinking that just before the inner surface there's different potential than outside the conductor due to different charge of the surface...I know I explained it very hard way...Can I post here a picture?

E: Yes I can!
 
Last edited:
here`s the picture! as you can see I am next Da Vince :D
 

Attachments

  • potdif.jpg
    potdif.jpg
    14 KB · Views: 430
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