Why doesn't my method for finding electric flux through a cube work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter latentcorpse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrostatics
latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
A point charge Q is placed at the centre of a cube. What is the electric flux through each face of the cube.

ok so the answer is to say that since the cube is a closed surface, Gauss' Law tells us that the total flux through the cube is \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0} and then from symmetry 1/6 of that is through each face. so the final answer is \Phi=\frac{Q}{\epsilon_0}.

I was wondering why i don't get the same answer when i do it this way:

set it up with cartesian coordinates. let's find the flux through the face with outward normal \vec{e_x}.

\vec{E}=\frac{Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 (\frac{a}{4})^2} \vec{r}

now \vec{r}=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}},) and \vec{e_x}=(1,0,0)
so \Phi=\int_S \vec{E} \cdot \vec{dA} = \frac{Q}{\pi \epsilon_0 a^2} \vec{r} \cdot \vec{e_x} \int_S dA = \frac{Q}{\pi \epsilon_0 a^2} \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} a^2

which ends up as \Phi=\frac{Q}{\sqrt{3} \pi \epsilon_0}

obviously the first way is much easier but surely it should be possible both ways?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


There are two problems that I can find:

  • The cube's surface is not a constant distance a/4 from the charge, as you appear to assume
  • The unit vector r^ is not (1/√3,1/√3,1/√3) everywhere on the surface.
 


ok yeah so i see now that its not a constant a/2 from each surface

what is \hat{\mathbf{r}} then (i really should know this!)

is it possible to do this problem this way or is gauss' law the only way?
 


latentcorpse said:
ok yeah so i see now that its not a constant a/2 from each surface

what is \hat{\mathbf{r}} then (i really should know this!)
The vector (x,y,z) points in the same direction as r^, everywhere. Normalize that vector, and you'll have r^.

is it possible to do this problem this way or is gauss' law the only way?
It should be possible, just not necessarily easy.
 


yeah so ({x \over |x|},{y \over |y|},{z \over |z|})

why doesn't the one i wrote earlier work though?
 


latentcorpse said:
yeah so ({x \over |x|},{y \over |y|},{z \over |z|})

Not quite, that vector just has components (±1,±1,±1). Try dividing by |r| instead of |x|, |y|, and |z|.

why doesn't the one i wrote earlier work though?
Not sure if this will help, but: the integral you're trying to do contains an r-hat term. What you wrote earlier is not equal to r-hat, therefore using it will give a wrong answer when you do the integral. (Or did I misunderstand your question here?)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top