What Is the Capacitance of Coaxial Infinite Cylinders?

Void123
Messages
138
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have two coaxial infinite cylinders and I must find their capacitance, where r_{1} < r_{2}

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



I got an answer (for finite cylinders) that is inversely proportional to Ln (r_{1}/r_{2}).

Assuming this answer is correct (if someone can check it), in order to make it infinite the two radii have to become infinitesimally small (0) correct? If I do this though, I get an indeterminate in the argument of log.

Have I done this wrong or must I rewrite my expression in terms of some approximate expansion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Are you sure the problem isn't asking you for the capacitance per unit length?
 


I am sure. I don't see how significant that is either, since I would just divide my expression by l. But, the road block at the moment is trying to infinitesimally minimize the radii so as to give me a finite solution.
 


It's significant because the reason you get an infinite answer is because l is infinite. Typically, this type of question asks you for the capacitance per unit length, which is a finite number.
 


Void123 said:
in order to make it infinite the two radii have to become infinitesimally small (0) correct?

No, in order two make the two cylinders infinitely long, you just make them longer.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top