Two Conducting Spheres connected by a wire

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around two conducting spheres of different radii connected by a long conductive wire. The original poster seeks to determine the charge on the larger sphere and compare the electric field strengths at the surfaces of both spheres.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to relate the surface charge densities of the two spheres, leading to confusion regarding the charge distribution and electric field strengths. Some participants question the assumption that the surface charge densities are equal, suggesting that the electric potential must be the same for both spheres due to their connection.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the implications of the electric potential being equal for both spheres and questioning the validity of the assumption regarding equal surface charge densities. There is an ongoing examination of how charge distributes on conductors of different shapes and sizes.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the spheres are far apart, which may influence the electric field interactions between them. The discussion includes considerations of charge distribution based on the geometry of the spheres.

tomizzo
Messages
113
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Two conducting spheres of radii rA and rB are connected by a very long conductive wire. The charge on sphere A is Qa and rA < rB.

What is the charge on sphere B?

Which sphere has the greater electric field strength immediately above its surface.

Homework Equations


Esurface = \eta/\epsilonnaught

The Attempt at a Solution



So I assume that any charge placed on the two conductors will reach an equilibrium which I assume would mean that both conductors have the same surface charge density.

That is:

Qa/(4\pi*rA^2)=Qb/(4\pi*rB^2).

However, when I solve for Qb, I get (rB/rA)^2*Qa which is incorrect. The correct answer is apparently (rB/rA)*Qa.

For the second question, I need to find the electric field strength at the surface of each conducting sphere. Well since I assumed that the surface charge density was the same, using the equation listed above, I should have equivalent electric field strengths. Instead, the answer states that the electric field strength on sphere A is greater than that of B. Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tomizzo said:

Homework Statement



Two conducting spheres of radii rA and rB are connected by a very long conductive wire. The charge on sphere A is Qa and rA < rB.

What is the charge on sphere B?

Which sphere has the greater electric field strength immediately above its surface.

Homework Equations


Esurface = \eta/\epsilonnaught

The Attempt at a Solution



So I assume that any charge placed on the two conductors will reach an equilibrium which I assume would mean that both conductors have the same surface charge density.

That is:

Qa/(4\pi*rA^2)=Qb/(4\pi*rB^2).

However, when I solve for Qb, I get (rB/rA)^2*Qa which is incorrect. The correct answer is apparently (rB/rA)*Qa.

For the second question, I need to find the electric field strength at the surface of each conducting sphere. Well since I assumed that the surface charge density was the same, using the equation listed above, I should have equivalent electric field strengths. Instead, the answer states that the electric field strength on sphere A is greater than that of B. Why?

There is no valid reason to conclude that the surface charge densities are equal.

The spheres are connected by a wire (conductor). What does that imply about the electric potential of each?
 
SammyS said:
There is no valid reason to conclude that the surface charge densities are equal.

The spheres are connected by a wire (conductor). What does that imply about the electric potential of each?


That would mean that the electric potential will be the same for each sphere.

So I'm starting to believe that the surface charge densities are not equal. However, why is this? If I were to put charge on a conductive plate, I would think that the charge repel each other and since it's a conductor, the charge would spread out equally across the plate. Thus giving a single surface charge density.

Is this assumption incorrect?
 
tomizzo said:
That would mean that the electric potential will be the same for each sphere.
Yes. That's correct.

So I'm starting to believe that the surface charge densities are not equal. However, why is this? If I were to put charge on a conductive plate, I would think that the charge repel each other and since it's a conductor, the charge would spread out equally across the plate. Thus giving a single surface charge density.

Is this assumption incorrect?
Yes. The assumption is incorrect.
 
SammyS said:
Yes. That's correct.


Yes. The assumption is incorrect.

I've tried to be as logical as I could about this. Do you care to elaborate on how this is incorrect?
 
tomizzo said:
I've tried to be as logical as I could about this. Do you care to elaborate on how this is incorrect?
What do we know about the charge distribution on an irregularly shaped conductor and the electric field near its surface?


Excess charge tends to accumulate in regions with smallest radius of curvature (in a convex sense) with less density where the radius of curvature is larger and even less dense in locally flat or concave regions.

The spheres are far apart. I expect that's so that the electric field from one doesn't much affect the other.
 
If QA is the charge on sphere A, what is the electrical potential at the surface of sphere A (relative to infinity)? If QB is the charge on sphere B, what is the electrical potential at the surface of sphere B (relative to infinity)?

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K