What Are the Assumptions and Calculations for Sheet of Charge Theory?

AI Thread Summary
When thickness is not specified for a plate, it is generally considered infinitely thin or arbitrarily thin for calculations. For a sheet of charge, the area used in the formula sigma=Q/A should account for both sides if Q represents the total charge. In the case of parallel plates with opposite charges, the area considered is typically that of one side where the charge resides. The Gaussian surface area does not need to be halved; it should reflect the area where the electric field is relevant. Charge distribution on a capacitor only considers the surface area, not the volume, as the surface area ratio is what matters for charge distribution.
Iamconfused123
Messages
66
Reaction score
9
Homework Statement
..
Relevant Equations
EA=Q/Eo, Sigma=Q/A, E=kQ/r^2
To some of these questions I can't find answers on the internet and to some I assume what the answer is but I'd still like to get a confirmation.


When I am not given the thickness of the plate, does that mean that the plate is intinitely thin?


What is the area of the sheet of charge when the sheet stands alone when we calculate sigma=Q/A, is it the surface area of both sides of the sheet or just one side?


What is the area in sigma=Q/A when we have a plate next to another parallel plate of opposite charge ( I assume for this one area to be only one side, but still)? In this case what area do we put in formla for Gaussian surface (EA=Q/Eo), because when two plates of opposite charges are next to each other then positive and negative charges on the same plate separate and the extra (for example of positive charge) eminate field only to the right, for example (or do they, I am not sure about this one), so should the area of the Gaussian surface be halved as well?


How does charge distribute itself over infinitely thin sheet? Is area for sigma=Q/A here only one side or both sides?


If charge does not reside IN the conductor but only on the outer surface, do we take only the surace area into account for charge distribution of the capacitor or do we care about volume?



Thank you very much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Iamconfused123 said:
When I am not given the thickness of the plate, does that mean that the plate is intinitely thin?
Either arbitrarily thin or, for the question asked, the thickness won't matter.
Iamconfused123 said:
What is the area of the sheet of charge when the sheet stands alone when we calculate sigma=Q/A, is it the surface area of both sides of the sheet or just one side?
If Q is the whole charge and ##\sigma## is the density on each side then A is the total area for the two sides.
Iamconfused123 said:
What is the area in sigma=Q/A when we have a plate next to another parallel plate of opposite charge ( I assume for this one area to be only one side, but still)?
If the arrangement ensures all the charge is on the same side then clearly A is just the area of that side.
Iamconfused123 said:
In this case what area do we put in formla for Gaussian surface (EA=Q/Eo), because when two plates of opposite charges are next to each other then positive and negative charges on the same plate separate and the extra (for example of positive charge) eminate field only to the right, for example (or do they, I am not sure about this one), so should the area of the Gaussian surface be halved as well?
I'm not sure I have understood the situation. Please give a specific example.
Iamconfused123 said:
How does charge distribute itself over infinitely thin sheet? Is area for sigma=Q/A here only one side or both sides?
No sheet is infinitely thin. It can be arbitrarily thin.
Iamconfused123 said:
If charge does not reside IN the conductor but only on the outer surface, do we take only the surace area into account for charge distribution of the capacitor or do we care about volume?
Not volume, which would be the product of surface area and plate separation. Instead, it is the ratio of the two that matters.
 
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 .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top