Point Charge in an uncharged spherical conductor

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the electric field around a point charge within a hollow, uncharged metal sphere using Gauss's Law. In the region 0 < r < R1, the electric field is zero because the electric field inside a conductor is always zero. For the region R1 < r < R2, the electric field is also zero as it is within the conductor's material. In the region r > R2, the electric field behaves as if the point charge were alone in space, with the conductor's influence effectively nullified. The participants clarify that the charge distribution on the conductor's surface adjusts to maintain zero electric field within the conductor itself.
SauerKrauter
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Consider a point charge q > 0 which is surrounded by a hollow metal sphere (uncharged) with inner radius R1 and outer radius R2. Use Gauss Law to determine the electric field E=E(r)er in the following regions:
(i) 0 < r < R1
(ii) R1 < r < R2
(iii) r > R2

Homework Equations



∫EdA = Q/ε

The Attempt at a Solution



(i) I believe the answer would be 0 because the electric field inside of an enclosed conductor is always zero
(ii) This is where my troubles really lie, don't know what to do here
(iii) I think that the electric field would be equatable to that of one where the point charge didn't exist outside the conductor as long as r is great enough, and i can solve for this
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SauerKrauter said:

Homework Statement



Consider a point charge q > 0 which is surrounded by a hollow metal sphere (uncharged) with inner radius R1 and outer radius R2. Use Gauss Law to determine the electric field E=E(r)er in the following regions:
(i) 0 < r < R1
(ii) R1 < r < R2
(iii) r > R2

Homework Equations



∫EdA = Q/ε

The Attempt at a Solution



(i) I believe the answer would be 0 because the electric field inside of an enclosed conductor is always zero
(ii) This is where my troubles really lie, don't know what to do here
(iii) I think that the electric field would be equatable to that of one where the point charge didn't exist outside the conductor as long as r is great enough, and i can solve for this
What is the precise location of the charge in the hollow of the sphere?
Is it at the center of the hollow?
Is the center of the hollow coincident with the center of the sphere?​


For items (i) & (ii):
The electric field in the conducting material itself is zero. (This is useful for (ii) but not for (i). )
Nothing says that the electric field must be zero In the hollow of a conductor. Gauss's Law confirms this.​
 
SauerKrauter said:

Homework Statement



Consider a point charge q > 0 which is surrounded by a hollow metal sphere (uncharged) with inner radius R1 and outer radius R2. Use Gauss Law to determine the electric field E=E(r)er in the following regions:
(i) 0 < r < R1
(ii) R1 < r < R2
(iii) r > R2

Homework Equations



∫EdA = Q/ε

The Attempt at a Solution



(i) I believe the answer would be 0 because the electric field inside of an enclosed conductor is always zero
Not if there is charge inside it!

(ii) This is where my troubles really lie, don't know what to do here
Can there be an E field in a conductor?

(iii) I think that the electric field would be equatable to that of one where the point charge didn't exist outside the conductor as long as r is great enough, and i can solve for this

I don't understand this statement.
 
yes everything is concentric, and I'm starting to see my erroneous thoughts.

(i) would just be the field as if no conductor was present yes? because I am checking the field at which it hasn't reached the conductor

(ii) would be zero because it is inside of the conductor which means the net electric field is zero

(iii) i am now not sure on, but think that it may be the same answer as (i) because the charge (lets say positive) in the conductor would pull all the electrons to the inside, leaving the outside of the conductor positively charged just like it would be before. Is this correct in theory?
 
SauerKrauter said:
yes everything is concentric, and I'm starting to see my erroneous thoughts.

(i) would just be the field as if no conductor was present yes? because I am checking the field at which it hasn't reached the conductor

(ii) would be zero because it is inside of the conductor which means the net electric field is zero

(iii) i am now not sure on, but think that it may be the same answer as (i) because the charge (lets say positive) in the conductor would pull all the electrons to the inside, leaving the outside of the conductor positively charged just like it would be before. Is this correct in theory?
Pretty much correct.

In (iii), it's not true that all the electrons are pulled to the inside. Gauss's Law tells us that just enough electrons are pulled to the inside so that the flux in the conducting material is zero. ...
 
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