Where to place Gaussian surface

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of the electric field between two oppositely charged plates using a Gaussian surface. It emphasizes that the Gaussian surface must include part of the plates to correctly determine the electric field, as placing it entirely between the plates would result in zero enclosed charge and thus zero net flux. However, this does not imply that the electric field itself is zero between the plates; rather, the electric field lines enter one side of the surface and exit the other, resulting in a net flux of zero. The key takeaway is the importance of strategically choosing the Gaussian surface to facilitate calculations while accurately reflecting the electric field's behavior. Understanding these principles is crucial for solving problems involving electric fields and Gaussian surfaces effectively.
henry3369
Messages
194
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm trying to calculate the electric field through two oppositely charged plates with the same magnitude:
http://imgur.com/uXCQqtW

Homework Equations


Flux = ∫E⋅dA = Qenclosed0

The Attempt at a Solution


I understand how the electric field is calculated using S1 and S4, but I have one question:
Why did the Gaussian surface have to contain a part of the plates? I ask this because if the surface was chosen to be between the plates, but not containing any parts of the plates, the electric field would be zero, since Qenclosed is zero and the area, A, as well as ε are both constants. But, the electric field is definitely not zero between the plates.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
henry3369 said:

Homework Statement


I'm trying to calculate the electric field through two oppositely charged plates with the same magnitude:
http://imgur.com/uXCQqtW

Homework Equations


Flux = ∫E⋅dA = Qenclosed0

The Attempt at a Solution


I understand how the electric field is calculated using S1 and S4, but I have one question:
Why did the Gaussian surface have to contain a part of the plates? I ask this because if the surface was chosen to be between the plates, but not containing any parts of the plates, the electric field would be zero, since Qenclosed is zero and the area, A, as well as ε are both constants. But, the electric field is definitely not zero between the plates.

The net flux is also zero if the flux across S1 and S4 (the opposite sides of the Gaussian surface) are of opposite signs and of equal magnitudes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ehild said:
The net flux is also zero if the flux across S1 and S4 (the opposite sides of the Gaussian surface) are of opposite signs and of equal magnitudes.
I'm not trying to find the net flux of S1 and S4. I'm using either S1 or S4 to find the electric field between the two charged plates. What I don't understand is why I can't use a Gaussian surface such as S1 and place it between the two plates without containing any parts of either plates to find the electric field. Because if it doesn't have any charge in it then E is zero because qenclosed is zero. But there obviously is an electric field between the plates.
 
You can place the Gaussian surface anywhere you want. The fact that:

Net flux of E through the surface = Charge inside the surface / epsilon_0

is true for any closed surface. If you place the surface with both faces between the plates, then the charge inside the surface is zero, and the net flux of E through the surface is also zero. But this does not mean that E =0 between the plates! There is a flux of E into the surface on one side, and a flux of E out of the surface on the other side, so the net flux of E through the surface is zero. You have to keep track of the signs. If you place the surface so that one face is between the plates and one face is inside the conductor (like S4), the flux of E through the part inside the conductor is zero, so you only have to consider the face inside the plates. The trick in these problems is cleverly choosing your Gaussian surface in order to make the calculation easy.
 
Thread 'Correct statement about size of wire to produce larger extension'
The answer is (B) but I don't really understand why. Based on formula of Young Modulus: $$x=\frac{FL}{AE}$$ The second wire made of the same material so it means they have same Young Modulus. Larger extension means larger value of ##x## so to get larger value of ##x## we can increase ##F## and ##L## and decrease ##A## I am not sure whether there is change in ##F## for first and second wire so I will just assume ##F## does not change. It leaves (B) and (C) as possible options so why is (C)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K