Question about charge density in a solid sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the surface charge density (sigma) of a thin spherical shell within a uniformly charged solid sphere. The volume charge density (rho) is defined as Q divided by the volume of the sphere. The user questions the relationship sigma = rho dr, expressing confusion about why this formula applies to a shell of infinitesimal width. They explain that the charge contained in the shell is derived from multiplying rho by the volume of the shell, leading to the conclusion that sigma represents a slice of the volume charge rather than a true surface charge. Clarification on this concept is sought to better understand the relationship between volume and surface charge densities.
LostInToronto
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I've already posted this question in the advanced physics forum, but I really think it should go here. My apologies for the double posting.

Homework Statement



If we are given a uniformly charged solid sphere with total charge Q and radius R, then the volume charge density rho is given by

\rho = \frac{Q}{\frac{4}{3} \pi R^3}.

My question is: How do we express the surface charge density sigma of a spherical shell of infinitesimal width dr, located within this solid sphere?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I keep reading that

\sigma = \rho dr

but I really don't understand why this is the case. If someone could help clear this up, I'd really appreciate it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, the charge dq contained in a shell of radius r and thickness dr is rho(r) times volume dV=4*pi*r^2*dr. Now surface charge density is charge dq divided by surface area 4*pi*r^2. So I suppose that would give you rho(r)*dr. But I'm not sure I'd really call that a 'surface charge'. I think it's really just a slice of the volume charge.
 
Thank you.
 
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