Uniform charged sphere with hole?

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about a uniformly charged sphere with a hole, the application of Gauss's law is questioned, leading to the suggestion of using superposition instead. The recommended approach involves first calculating the electric field of the original sphere, then determining the field from an oppositely charged sphere representing the hole, and finally summing these two fields. This method allows for the maintenance of electrostatic conditions despite the presence of the hole. The participants confirm this approach as a valid way to analyze the electric field in this scenario. Overall, the consensus is that superposition is a practical solution for this problem.
philipc
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Lets say I have a sphere of uniform charge, and a hole was removed any where within the sphere, would Gauss law be usless and I would have to go with superpostion? And I'm wondering how to set the integral in either case.
Thanks
Philip
 
Physics news on Phys.org
many times the divergence teorem is hard to apply, then you can try to solve that thinking about the hole has a charge opposite to the complete sphere in order to maintain the electrostatic condition.
 
If you're trying to calculate the electric field in the case of the sphere "with a hole" in it then I recommend (a) calculate the field for the original charge distribution, (b) calculate the electric field produced by an oppositely charged sphere where the hole is and then (c) adding the results of (a) and (b).
 
Oh, sorry, I see Diego essentially made the same suggestion!
 
Thanks, let's see if I'm thinking right here? First I find the efield at the point as though there was no hole. 2) I find the efield of the point do to the smaller sphere using a -charge density. 3) I sum the two efields together to get final results?
Again thanks for your help
Philip
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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...
Back
Top