What is the magnitude of the electric field (rod)?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field between two uniformly charged glass rods that are 4.70 cm apart and 11.3 cm long, each charged to +10.4 nC. A participant initially calculated the electric field magnitude as -1.21*10^5 N/C but expressed confusion about the validity of treating the rods as infinitely long. Others pointed out that the formula used is applicable only for infinitely long rods, suggesting that the finite length of the rods should be considered. The conversation highlights the need for a different approach or calculus to accurately determine the electric field for rods of finite length. Understanding the limitations of the equations used is crucial for solving the problem correctly.
sunnnystrong
Messages
54
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement


Two thin glass rods are placed side by side 4.70 cm apart as shown in the diagram below. They are each 11.3 cm long and are uniformly charged to +10.4 nC .

Answer the questions below regarding the electric field along a line which is drawn through the middle of the two glass rods (labeled Bisector in the diagram).

(Figure 1)

Homework Equations


*See attached file for relevant equations*

The Attempt at a Solution



Length = 0.113 m
λ = 9.20×10^−8 C/m
Eo = 8.85*10^-12
r1 = 0.037m
r2 = 0.01m

Using the attached equation... I got -1.21*10^5 N/C ... the magnitude of the field is 1.21*10^5 N/C

I know this is wrong but I am confused as to why?
 

Attachments

  • 222-5-1_Glass_Rods.png
    222-5-1_Glass_Rods.png
    1.6 KB · Views: 470
  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    5.2 KB · Views: 459
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you allowed to treat the rods as infinitely long?
 
TSny said:
Are you allowed to treat the rods as infinitely long?

Honestly, I have no idea. I am confused about how to set this problem up but found this equation in my book.
 
TSny said:
Are you allowed to treat the rods as infinitely long?
I would think not though as they gave you the length of the rods ?
 
sunnnystrong said:
I would think not though as they gave you the length of the rods ?
I tend to agree with you, that they do not want you to approximate the rods as infinitely long. But the formula for E that you are using is for an infinitely long rod.

Do you have an idea of how to handle the case of a rod of finite length? Are you using calculus in your course?
 
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...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top