What is the Electric Field for a Charged Sheet at Different Distances?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field created by a uniformly charged aluminum foil sheet at two different distances. For a position 0.01m above the surface, the formula E = charge density/(2ε) is applicable, as it is close to the sheet. However, at 20m above the sheet, this formula is not suitable, and participants suggest treating the sheet as a point charge due to the distance. The conversation emphasizes the importance of considering the charge distribution and distance when calculating the electric field. Participants are encouraged to break down the problem by considering the sheet as multiple point charges to better understand the electric field at greater distances.
Fanman22
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
A flat square sheet of thin aluminum foil, 25 cm on a side, carries a uniformly distributed -36 nC charge. What is the approximate electric field at the following positions?

a.)0.01m above surface?
b.) 20m above the sheet?


For a.), I used E=chargedensity/(2)epsilon. From my understanding, this can only be used for points far from the edges and close to a surface.

So for b.), this formula does not apply. I cannot find anything in my notes or the text that describes this situation.

Any suggestions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Fanman22 said:
For a.), I used E=chargedensity/(2)epsilon. From my understanding, this can only be used for points far from the edges and close to a surface.
Right.

So for b.), this formula does not apply. I cannot find anything in my notes or the text that describes this situation.
Hint: If you are far enough away, you can treat the object as a charged particle.
 
Fanman22 said:
So for b.), this formula does not apply. I cannot find anything in my notes or the text that describes this situation.

Try breaking it down. If the charge on the plate were a single point charge, what would the field be? If the charge was split into two point charges separated by 25 cm, how much would this change the result? What about 3 or 4?
 
damn, I tried that earlier because it seemed like as you got further and further away, the sheet would appear small (like a pt charge)...only problem was...I forgot to square the 20m
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top