Potential difference between two cylinders

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
I need help with the attached exercise. Problem is not that I am not able to do it. You can find the field of an infinite cylinder with Gauss' law and then use that to find the potential difference.
My solutions notes however do it in a slightly different way, still arriving at the correct results. They use the expression for the potential of an infinite line:

V(r) = −1/(4\pi\epsilon0)(2Q/L) ln(r/R0)

And simply use that to calculate the potential difference. Can someone explain to me why this would yield the same result?
 

Attachments

  • em2-39.jpg
    em2-39.jpg
    17.3 KB · Views: 846
Physics news on Phys.org
hi aaaa202!
aaaa202 said:
They use the expression for the potential of an infinite line:

V(r) = −1/(4\pi\epsilon0)(2Q/L) ln(r/R0)

And simply use that to calculate the potential difference. Can someone explain to me why this would yield the same result?

an infinite uniformly charged line and an infinite uniformly charged cylinder clearly both have cylindrically symmetric potentials (and fields)

so any cylinder larger than both will be an equipotential surface, and so from Gauss' law, if the enclosed charge-per-length is the same, so will be the fields (and the potentials) :wink:
 
Hmm okay. So is it because you mightaswell view the field of an infinite cylinder with charge Q as that of an infinite line placed along the center of the cylinder with the same charge?
 
outside the cylinder, yes! :smile:
 
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