The discussion revolves around the concept of symmetry in electric fields generated by different charge distributions, specifically focusing on solid uniformly charged spheres, infinite cylinders, and thick slabs. Participants explore the implications of dimensional symmetry (1D, 2D, and 3D) in relation to these geometries.
The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and raising questions about the definitions and implications of symmetry in the context of electric fields. Some participants express confusion regarding the categorization of symmetry and the relevance of geometric properties to the electric field behavior.
There is a noted lack of consensus on the terminology used to describe symmetry, with suggestions to use more specific terms like spherical, cylindrical, and planar symmetry. Participants also highlight the importance of understanding the charge distribution's effect on the electric field in finite versus infinite geometries.
##\tellmesomething said:Yes I got that, the z axis is the cylinder's axis, the y axis is one of the two axes in the cross section of the cylinder... View attachment 345757
The above image is the reference axes I took. In the image below the person has taken the cylinder's axis as y axis and the axis whose field im confused about as z axis.
This is an argument I received for why there's no field along the z axis (in this person's diagram)however I dont understand how its symmetrical thereView attachment 345758
As you say the field is everywhere normal to the cylinder's axis I agree with that but he says otherwise .View attachment 345759
It is not on the axis, but ##z = 0##. The axes are defined such that the ##z## direction is the tangential direction at the point being considered.haruspex said:##\vec E## is a function of position. The writer does not make it clear what position is being considered. It seems to be a point on the cylinder’s axis, in which case it is zero.
The only point being considered is a single point along the x-axis. This is sufficient since it can be mapped to any other point at the same radial distance using translation and rotation.haruspex said:If we consider a point ##z\hat z## (in the writer's notation), ##z\neq 0##, then the rotation through ##\pi## about the x axis maps it to ##-z\hat z## and flips the field to ##-\vec E(z\hat z)=\vec E(-z\hat z)## (because of the symmetry).
Where's the contradiction?
tellmesomething said:Yes I got that, the z axis is the cylinder's axis, the y axis is one of the two axes in the cross section of the cylinder... View attachment 345757
The above image is the reference axes I took. In the image below the person has taken the cylinder's axis as y axis and the axis whose field im confused about as z axis.
This is an argument I received for why there's no field along the z axis (in this person's diagram)however I dont understand how its symmetrical thereView attachment 345758
As you say the field is everywhere normal to the cylinder's axis I agree with that but he says otherwise .
Okay I see, a point on the y axis (in my diagram) would also have field ## E_y ## a point the x and y plane would also have fields (## E_x##& ##E_y##) but a point on the cylinder's axis would not have any net field.Orodruin said:I mean, it is not very clearly argued. The actual argument is to consider the reflection symmetry in a plane through the central axis and the point you are considering the field at. Since the electric field is a proper vector, the component orthogonal to the reflection plane changes sign under the reflection. However, the charge distribution is the same before and after the reflection and therefore the field must also be the same. The component in the y-direction must therefore equal its own negative, which can only happen if it is zero.
haruspex said:@Orodruin has explained to me that the point being considered is on the x axis. Consequently ##\vec E_y=\vec E_z=0## is consistent with the field being normal to the cylinder's axis. What made you think it was not?
The y axis is also normal to the cylinder's axis...haruspex said:The field is everywhere normal to the cylinder axis
Yes, ##\vec E(x\hat x)=f(x)\hat x##, so no ##\hat y## or ##\hat z## term.tellmesomething said:The y axis is also normal to the cylinder's axis...
But I think I get it it also depends on where the reference point is...so