Symmetry Arguments-a finite cylindrical can

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on analyzing the electric field of a uniformly charged finite cylindrical can using symmetry arguments. For points along the can's central axis and on the plane that bisects the can, the symmetry suggests that the electric field is zero due to equal contributions from opposite sides canceling each other out. At the exact center of the can, the electric field is also zero, reflecting perfect symmetry in all directions. Participants clarify that the problem focuses on the direction of the electric field rather than its magnitude, eliminating the need for complex calculations like integration. The interpretation of the can shape, including whether to consider the top and bottom, is noted but deemed irrelevant to the symmetry analysis.
jromega3
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Symmetry Arguments--a finite cylindrical can

Homework Statement


Consider a finite cylindrical can shape that has charge uniformly distributed on its surface. Symmetry does allow us to say some things about the electric field of this distribution
A) at points along the can's central axis
B) At points lying on the plane that cuts the can in half perpendicular to its central axis
C) at the can's exact center

What does symmetry tell us in these three cases?

Hint: be sure to consider both the direction of the electric field and on what variables it might or might not depend

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Ok, first off, I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to be doing exactly, and is the shape just like a soda can, and the surface the outside not including the top/bottom, ie the body?

a and b to me are confusing. I could see them being zero, but at the same time, they depend on the point you're using on the plane, so I believe you'd have to use an integral, but that'd be a double integral and that seems to complex for this problem.
For A it seems as if it's completely symmetrical across the plane, and it seems to be true for B as well. Meaning there'd be no net charge on either. hmm

c) I'd imagine this has to be zero. Perfect symmetry in all directions and uniform distribution throughout.

So I guess I'm just looking for a start on where I should be heading for and what I should be trying to solve. Thanks, as always, in advance for the great help. Truly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


Hmm, I interpreted a "can shape" as including the top and bottom. However, I don't think that will affect these questions.

(a) and (b) have more to do with what direction the field points toward. They don't want the actual value of the field, just its direction, so no integration is necessary.

You're correct about (c).
 
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