Potential of a metal sphere with changing radius

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of the electric potential of an inflatable metal sphere as its radius changes. Initially charged to 1000 V, the potential is expected to decrease to 500 V when the radius doubles, due to the inverse relationship between potential and radius. The confusion arises regarding the potential at points on the sphere, as it seems to suggest an infinite potential when considering a test charge at zero distance from a charge element on the sphere. Clarification is provided that the potential is measured relative to a point at infinity, not at points on the sphere itself. The need for the potential function to be piecewise smooth is emphasized, as it ensures the electric field can be properly defined.
purple88hayes
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



An inflatable metal balloon assumed to be spherical with radius R is charged to a potential of 1000 V. After all the wires and batteries are disconnected, the balloon is inflated to a new radius 2R. Does the potential of the balloon change as it is inflated? If so, by what factor? If not, why not?


Homework Equations



V(pt. charge) = kQ/R


The Attempt at a Solution



I think the answer should be that yes, V does change by a factor of 1/2 since R increases by 2 and V is proportional to 1/R. However, I also want to think the potential is infinite at a point on the sphere. I think I understand that we can treat the sphere as a point charge, but what I don't understand is what happens when a charged particle is on the sphere. Why doesn't potential go to infinity? It seems that since the distance between some bit charge dQ of the sphere and the test charge is 0 this would blow up to infinity. I'm probably over-thinking the question but I seem to have dug myself into a hole of thorough confusion. Can someone help explain this to me? Any help is appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are we talking about the potential relative to a point inside the sphere or outside the sphere?
 
I'm assuming when they say 1000V that's at point a point on R relative to infinity. So outside.
 
Cool, thanks for your help, I really appreciate it! Those pictures were very useful! I'm still confused though. Why the function has to be piecewise smooth?
 
purple88hayes said:
I'm still confused though. Why the function has to be piecewise smooth?
Note that the electric field can be expressed as the gradient of the potential,

\underline{E} = \nabla V

Therefore, the potential must be continuously differentiable (at least once) in order to be physically meaningful, i.e. in order to associate an electric field with the potential, we must be able to differentiate it at least once. Therefore, the potential must be [piecewise] smooth.
 
Alright, I think that makes sense. Thanks again for all your help!
 
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...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top