What is the electric flux through the hemispherical surface?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating electric flux through a hemispherical surface in two scenarios: when the electric field E is parallel and when it is perpendicular to the axis of the hemisphere. For the parallel case, the initial interpretation suggests using the formula for electric flux, leading to the conclusion that the flux equals EA. However, it is clarified that the field is not parallel to the surface, necessitating the evaluation of the surface integral Φ_E = ∫E·n da, where n is the unit normal vector. In the perpendicular case, the correct approach also involves this integral, indicating that the initial assumptions may overlook critical aspects of the geometry involved. Understanding the coordinate system and the relationship between E and n is essential for accurate calculations.
physics231
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
A uniform field E is parallel to the axis of a hollow hemisphere of radius R. a) What is the electric flux through the hemispherical surface? b) What is the result if E is instead perpendicular to the axis?

Here is what I've interpretted so far. If the field is parallel to the surface, then the electric flux = EA cos(theta). With the angle being 0, I came up with the answer as just EA Therefore that is my answer on part a).

On part b) if the field is perpendicular then the electric flux is just = EA, therefore making that my answer. But I know this isn't right. What step am I missing? Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well the field is certainly not parallel to the surface in both cases. You'll have to evaluate the surface integral

\Phi_E=\int\vec{E}\cdot \hat{n}da

where \hat{n} is the unit vector parallel to the surface element da.

Hint: If you chose a coordinate system in which the origin is on the center of the hollow sphere and in which the z-axis IS the axis of the hollow hemisphere, then what are \vec{E} and \hat{n}?
 
Last edited:
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