No Limits of Integration for Electric Field Integral?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the integration limits for calculating the electric field from a uniformly charged ring. The absence of integration limits is justified by the assumption that all charge elements across the ring contribute to a total charge Q. A uniform linear charge density is defined, allowing for the calculation of charge elements and their integration around the ring. The conversation also clarifies that the ring is treated as "thin," meaning its width is negligible for the calculations. If the ring had a width, a different approach involving integration over the radial dimensions would be necessary.
member 731016
Homework Statement
This is a more concise version of my 'Electric Field of a Uniform Ring of Charge' thread that I posted yesterday and made a typo.
Relevant Equations
Continuous charge distribution formula
For this problem,

s7y2w.png
uCKQS.png


The solution is,

ok160.png


However, why have they not included limits of integration? I think this is because all the small charge elements dq across the ring add up to Q.

However, how would you solve this problem with limits of integration?

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can assume a uniform linear charge density on the ring, ##\lambda=\dfrac{Q}{2\pi a}.## Then an arc element ##ds## at polar angle ##\phi## in the plane of the ring subtends angle ##d\phi## so that ##ds=a d\phi##. The charge on that element is ##dq=\lambda ds=\lambda a d\phi## so that when you integrate going around the ring once, you have $$\int dq=\int_0^{2\pi}\lambda a d\phi=2\pi a\lambda=2\pi a\frac{Q}{2\pi a}=Q$$Does this answer your question?
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
kuruman said:
You can assume a uniform linear charge density on the ring, ##\lambda=\dfrac{Q}{2\pi a}.## Then an arc element ##ds## at polar angle ##\phi## in the plane of the ring subtends angle ##d\phi## so that ##ds=a d\phi##. The charge on that element is ##dq=\lambda ds=\lambda a d\phi## so that when you integrate going around the ring once, you have $$\int dq=\int_0^{2\pi}\lambda a d\phi=2\pi a\lambda=2\pi a\frac{Q}{2\pi a}=Q$$Does this answer your question?
Thanks for your answer @kuruman, I think that answers my question for now!
 
kuruman said:
You can assume a uniform linear charge density on the ring, ##\lambda=\dfrac{Q}{2\pi a}.## Then an arc element ##ds## at polar angle ##\phi## in the plane of the ring subtends angle ##d\phi## so that ##ds=a d\phi##. The charge on that element is ##dq=\lambda ds=\lambda a d\phi## so that when you integrate going around the ring once, you have $$\int dq=\int_0^{2\pi}\lambda a d\phi=2\pi a\lambda=2\pi a\frac{Q}{2\pi a}=Q$$Does this answer your question?
Sorry @kuruman, why are you allowed to use the linear charge density, because doesn't the ring have a width too?

Are you assuming that x >> width, so the width is negligible?

Many thanks!
 
Callumnc1 said:
Sorry @kuruman, why are you allowed to use the linear charge density, because doesn't the ring have a width too?
No, it does not have a width because the calculation assumes that it is a "thin" ring which means zero width. If it has a width, say it is a washer of inner radius ##a## and outer radius ##b##, then you have to do a different calculation and also integrate over ##r## from ##a## to ##b##. That's a different homework problem.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes cwill53 and member 731016
  • Like
Likes cwill53 and kuruman
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 .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top