Solving Electric Field & Potential of Infinitely Long Rod

  • Thread starter Thread starter germx3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rod
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving the electric field and potential of an infinitely long charged rod. Part (a) is addressed using Gauss' Law, demonstrating that the electric field inside the rod points radially outward with a magnitude of E = ρr/2ε₀. For part (b), the challenge lies in calculating the potential difference from the rod's surface to its axis, utilizing the formula V = -∫ E · dr. The integration requires applying cylindrical coordinates and substituting the derived electric field into the integral. The higher potential is at the rod's surface compared to its axis.
germx3
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
The problem:

An infinitely long rod of radius R carries a uniform volume charge
density ρ (ρ > 0).

(a) Show how to use Gauss' Law to prove that the
electric field inside this rod points radially
outward and has magnitude:

E = \rho r/2\epsilon_0

(b) Integrate the electric field over an appropriate
displacement to find the potential difference from
the rod's surface to its axis. State explicitly
which of those two locations is at the higher
potential.


My answer:

I solved for part (a) using a Gaussian surface symmetry and got this as my final answer.

E(2 \pi rL) = \rho r/2 \epsilon_0
E = \rho r/2\epsilon_0

I am having a hard time starting part (b). I am not sure where to start.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Electric potencial is a path integral of electric intensity from point A to point B
 
More specifically the formula is V = -\int^0_{R} \mathbf{E} \cdot d\mathbf{r}. In this case since you've derived the expression in cylindrical coordinates you might as well make use of cylindrical basis vectors for the line integral. Just substitute all the values into the integration, find the dot product and integrate.
 
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