Why does Coulomb's Law include a pi in the denominator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Old Guy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Coulomb
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Coulomb's Law and Gauss' Law in calculating the electric field due to a uniform straight infinite line charge. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the presence of pi in the denominator of the Coulomb's Law solution compared to the Gauss' Law solution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to reconcile the differences in the denominators of the electric field equations derived from Coulomb's Law and Gauss' Law. A participant requests a detailed breakdown of the steps to identify potential errors.

Discussion Status

The discussion has progressed with the original poster acknowledging an integration error after detailing their steps, indicating a productive direction in resolving their confusion.

Contextual Notes

The original poster's inquiry highlights the nuances in applying different laws in electrostatics and the potential for errors in mathematical derivations.

Old Guy
Messages
101
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


I'm sure I'm missing something simple here, but to the point:

I calculate the electric field a distance r from a uniform straight infinite line charge using Gauss' Law and get an answer; I do the same calculation using Coulomb's law and get the same answer but a pi remains in the denominator (that was not there in the Gauss' Law solution). I don't know how to enter the equation here, but in both answers the numerator is the linear charge density. The Gauss' Law denonminator is 2r times epsilon; Coulomb's law denominator is 2(pi)r times epsilon. Help!


Homework Equations


See above


The Attempt at a Solution


See above
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you write out each of your steps? Maybe then one of us'll be able to spot the error.
 
Well, thanks for the fast response. In writing out the steps as you requested I caught a (dumb) integration error - I'm straight now. Thanks.
 
Old Guy said:
Well, thanks for the fast response. In writing out the steps as you requested I caught a (dumb) integration error - I'm straight now. Thanks.

You can't imagine how many times I've been stumped on a problem only to realize my error while explaining what I did to someone. :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K