What Is the Electric Field at the Surface of a Nucleus with 89 Protons?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric field at the surface of a nucleus with 89 protons, modeled as a uniformly charged sphere with a radius of 7.11e-15 m. An initial attempt using the formula E=F/q led to a calculated electric field of 2.53e21 N/C, which was deemed incorrect. Participants suggest that applying Gauss's law might provide a simpler and more accurate solution, although there is uncertainty about whether this method has been covered in their coursework. Despite using Gauss's law, one participant received the same answer as the initial calculation, raising questions about the accuracy of both methods. The discussion highlights the complexities of calculating electric fields in nuclear physics.
kyin01
Messages
47
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A certain atom of has 89 protons. Assume that the nucleus is a sphere with radius 7.11e-15 m and with the charge of the protons uniformly spread through the sphere. At the nucleus surface what is the magnitude of the electric field produced by the protons?

Homework Equations


E=F/q

F=(q1q2 * 8.99e9)/ d2

a single proton has a charge of 1.6e-19 C

3. The Attempt at a Solution [/b]
So my understanding of the problem is they want me to calculate the electric field at the edge of the nucleus.
so I started my assuming the electric field being at the center of the nucleus with my test charge at the edge of the nucleus. So I did 89 times the charge of a single proton times the constant all divided by the radius squared and I get a number of
2.53e21 N/C

which I am told is wrong, what did I do wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think this would do better in Physics homework.
 
I believe that's the hard way to do that. You don't really know the force of all the protons. An easier way to do the problem would be to use Gauss's law.
 
Ithryndil said:
I believe that's the hard way to do that. You don't really know the force of all the protons. An easier way to do the problem would be to use Gauss's law.

I don't think he introduced us that law yet, am i doing it right in the hard way method?
 
kyin01 said:
I don't think he introduced us that law yet, am i doing it right in the hard way method?

Interesting. When I did it with Gauss's law the answer I got is the same as the answer you got...so why it says it's wrong is beyond me. Perhaps we are both missing something.
 
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...
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 .
Back
Top