i wanted to ask why the electric field inside a hollow conductor zero throughout and not just at the centre.
Well, if you open up your textbook, and skim to the sections on Gauss' Law and spherical distributions of charge, do you see some hints about what is going on with a hollow conductor? What kind of boundary condition volume is typically used with Gauss' Law?okk as u say well i have done a lot of work and research i know tht there is no electric field inside a conductor bt i am not able to prove it mathematically and moreover electrical charges in conductors move to the surface becoz no electric field is there in a conductor becoz if there is a field then charges will move to neutralizze it.when an external electrical field is present then charges rearrange tso that no electric field is there in the conductor bt still mathematically i am not able to prove it
Merryjman, are you familiar with the math involved in here? I have got stuck in another similar problem:Isaac Newton used what is called "Shell Theorem" to rigorously prove some important things about spherical shells, one of which is what I mention above, and another of which is that any spherical object can be modeled as a point mass when you are located outside the object.
The thing is, proof for this statement still eludes us. It is certainly quite unexpected, as unexpected as the Shell Theorem, so I'd appreciate some proof.I'm not sure that's true. What happens in an external field is that the conductor will become polarized, and it polarizes in such a way that the field inside is still zero.
I wrote some of the Wikipedia article on Shell Theorem, so I am familiar with most of the math. I'll look at that thread.Merryjman, are you familiar with the math involved in here? I have got stuck in another similar problem:
It's conceivable the total force is zero on the surface, where each infinitesimal charge sits, and non-zero inside.If the electric field inside a conductor was NOT zero, then there would be a force acting on the mobile charges, and so they would rearrange until the force WAS zero.
Inside a conductor, charges are free to move. If there were a non-zero field there, they'd move. (They move until the field is canceled.)Why? The field inside need not be identical to the field on the surface. Might be zero inside and non-zero on the surface or vice versa when equilibrium is reached.
In equilibrium there are no charges inside. So electric field inside can be non-zero in equilibrium (under the influence of an additional external field).Inside a conductor, charges are free to move. If there were a non-zero field there, they'd move. (They move until the field is canceled.)
Why do you say that there are no charges inside a conductor? There is no field inside a conductor.In equilibrium there are no charges inside. So electric field inside can be non-zero in equilibrium (under the influence of an external field always).
Wrong again. On what basis do you say this? The field inside a conductor does not depend on the shape of the conductor.Even without an external field, if the object is not spherical the electric field inside will be non-zero, in equilibrium. That's for a charged object of course.
True, but it does imply zero NET field, in terms of vectors. The electric fields you speak of, produced by the polarization, would serve to balance the external field.In fact an electron on the surface might experience no net force (in equilibrium) but still produce a field of its own in its vicinity. So equilbrium of electrons does NOT imply zero electric field around them.