Potential Difference between conductors for a coaxial cable, conflict

rwooduk
Messages
757
Reaction score
59
conflicting results.

find the potential between the two conductors of a coaxial cable



I have already found E... E = lambda / 2 pi r epsilon



my question: What are the integration limits for finding the potential between the conductors?

say we have a radius a (inner conductor) and a radius b (outer conductor). do i integrate between a and b to find the potential between them?

This video says yes...



however if i do that V between the conductors will be CONSTANT i.e the integral will give log of a over b.

This video says no...



in this video he takes the limits between r and b, thus his solution will be a function of r, NOT CONSTANT. then he draws a graph to show it.

SO is the potential between the conducting plates constant (ln (a/b)) or NOT constant (ln (b/r)).

thanks for any help!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It all depends on the interpretation of "potential between the two conductors".

If you mean the difference in potential between a point on the inner conductor and a point on the outer conductor, then the answer will be a constant that depends on a and b. If you mean the difference in potential between a point on the inner conductor and an arbitrary point lying between the conductors, then the answer will be a function of the distance r of the arbitrary point from the central axis of the cable.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
hmm the question says

Calculate the total potential difference delta V between the conductors if they were to carry equal and opposite charges +/- Q on the conductors.

since it says between the conductors then I'm assuming it means any point between them so it would be a function of r.

thanks for the help!

edit any idea why in the second video he uses the outer conductor (b) and a point between the conductors as the limits, and not the inner conductor (a) and a point between the conductors as the limits?
 
rwooduk said:
hmm the question says

Calculate the total potential difference delta V between the conductors if they were to carry equal and opposite charges +/- Q on the conductors.

since it says between the conductors then I'm assuming it means any point between them so it would be a function of r.

Actually, from the wording I think they are likely asking for the difference in potential between points on the the inner conductor and points on the outer conductor. If they wanted V as a function of r, I think they would have asked for the potential at points between the conductors. The phrase "total potential difference between the conductors" seems to me to mean the difference in potential as you go from one conductor to the other. It's similar to picking two points p1 and p2 in space and asking for the potential difference between the two points. That would generally be interpreted as finding V2-V1 where V2 is the potential at p2 and V1 is the potential at p1. That's my opinion, anyway.

any idea why in the second video he uses the outer conductor (b) and a point between the conductors as the limits, and not the inner conductor (a) and a point between the conductors as the limits?

He is starting at infinity where he is taking the potential to be zero and integrating ##\small \vec{E}\cdot d \vec{r}## to find the potential relative to infinity. So, he reaches the outer conductor first and then integrates from there on into the space between the conductors.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
When you put it like that I agree. And I see, thanks for the additional reply!
 
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