How Do You Compute the Electric Potential Using the Method of Image Charges?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on using the method of image charges to compute the electric potential between two semi-infinite grounded conducting planes. The user proposes three image charges to satisfy boundary conditions, specifically two negative charges and one positive charge, and presents a potential equation that meets the criteria of zero potential at the planes. There is uncertainty about the justification for the chosen image charges and whether guesses are acceptable if they satisfy the conditions. The user also calculates the charge density on the planes, expressing it in terms of the potential's derivatives, and acknowledges a potential error in symmetry regarding the charge distribution. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for rigorous justification in applying the method of image charges.
BOAS
Messages
546
Reaction score
19
Hi,

I am learning about the method of image charges, but am struggling to sufficiently justify my answer. It appears to be correct, though it quite possibly isn't...

1. Homework Statement

(please see attached item)

Two semi-infinite grounded conducting planes (the shaded region in the figure, corresponding to ##x ≤ 0## or ##y ≤ 0)## meet at right angles. In the region between them (i.e. ##x > 0## and ##y > 0##), there is a point charge, at a distance ##d## from each plane, as indicated in the figure. Set the z axis such that the charge q is at ##z = 0##.

(a) To compute the potential between the planes you need three image charges. What is their magnitude and where should they be located?

(b) Compute the electric potential between the planes.

(c) Compute the electric charge density σ on the planes.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
My answer to part (a) is essentially a guess, based on creating a symmetrical situation. I don't know how to justify it properly, and would love some help regarding this.

I have said that I need 2 charges of -q and one of charge +q.

-q (-d, d)
-q (d, -d)
+q (-d, -d)

Are the coordinates that I think they should be placed at.

I then look at the potential, and see that ##V(x,y) = \frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_{0}} [\frac{q}{\sqrt{(x-d)^{2} + (y-d)^{2}}} - \frac{q}{\sqrt{(x+d)^{2} + (y-d)^{2}}} - \frac{q}{\sqrt{(x-d)^{2} + (y+d)^{2}}} + \frac{q}{\sqrt{(x+d)^{2} + (y+d)^{2}}}]##

which satisfies the conditions that at ##V(0,y) = 0## and ##V(x,0) = 0##

Am I on the right track here?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Looks good to me !
 
BvU said:
Looks good to me !

That is good to hear! I do feel like I have cheated somewhat though. Is there a rigorous method to go about this, or is a guess generally acceptable provided it can be shown to satisfy the conditions?

For part (c) I need to find the charge distributions on each plane. I have done that in the same way I would for a single plane, and the expressions look like they make physical sense to me.

##\sigma_{x} = - \epsilon_{0} \frac{\partial V}{\partial y}|_{y = 0} = - \frac{q}{2 \pi} [\frac{d}{((x - d)^{2} + d^{2})^{3/2}} - \frac{d}{((x + d)^{2} + d^{2})^{3/2}} ]##

and ##\sigma_{y} = - \epsilon_{0} \frac{\partial V}{\partial x}|_{x = 0} = - \frac{q}{2 \pi} [\frac{d}{((y - d)^{2} + d^{2})^{3/2}} - \frac{d}{((y + d)^{2} + d^{2})^{3/2}} ]##

I think this makes sense because as the charge distribution would not be constant along the planes
 
Last edited:
Doesn't look symmetric around y = x !?
try x = d and you'll see the error
[edit] yes the ##(x-d)^2 -d^2## should have been ##(x-d)^2+d^2##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BOAS
BvU said:
Doesn't look symmetric around y = x !?
try x = d and you'll see the error

Sorry, what doesn't look symmetric around y = x?

Edit - Fixed a typo in my ##\sigma_{x}## expression
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top