Why is E-field 0 outside of this sphere?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of the electric field (E-field) outside a conducting sphere, specifically why it is zero for r > c, where c is the radius of the outer sphere. Grounding the sphere ensures its electric potential is zero, leading to a net charge of zero on its outer surface. The E-field inside the conductor cancels the field from the central charge, resulting in no field outside the sphere. The integral for the electric field is correctly taken from r = a to r = b, not r = a to r = c, because the outer sphere's influence is not considered beyond its surface. Overall, the grounding and charge distribution explain the absence of an E-field outside the conducting shell.
flyingpig
Messages
2,574
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/5992/gauss.th.png

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


2. Solutions

For b) - iv

They say the E-field is 0 for r > c

Why?

Also for part c), they say the answer should be the integral from r = a to r = b.

My question is, why isn't it from r = a to r = c (c is the surface of the other sphere)?

What does "grounding" the sphere actually tell you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Since the outer sphere is a conducting sphere the charges will be attracted to one side of the sphere due to the electric field caused by the charge at the center. So the field when the charge is positive is directed radially outward, this causes the elctrons to move to the inner part of the sphere while leaving the outer part positively charged and thus a field is generated inside the material which cancels the field of the charge.

For you final question the field in the outer sphere is zero and therefore the potential difference is not altered within the conducting shell since it has no magnetic field inside.

If you have any questions please ask!
 
Grounding the spherical shell means that its electric potential is made to be zero. Therefore, you know that the electric field outside the shell is zero. Also, the net charge on the outer surface of the shell is zero.
 
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