Why is the electric potential constant inside a spherical conducting shell?

AI Thread Summary
In a spherical conducting shell, the electric field inside is zero, as determined by Gauss's Law, leading to a constant electric potential throughout the interior. Since the electric field is the gradient of the potential, when the electric field is zero, the potential must remain constant. This constant potential inside the shell is equal to the potential on the surface of the shell. If there were different potentials within the shell, charges would move in response to the potential difference, which does not occur when the electric field is zero. Thus, the potential remains uniform inside the shell.
Corneo
Messages
320
Reaction score
0
Consider a spherical conducting shell where all the charges reside on the surface. Using Gauss's Law, it can be found that the electric field inside the shell is zero. But why is the electric potential a constant? More over, why is the potential same as the potential on the surface of the shell? Please refer to the voltage plots in the following link.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The electric field is just the derivative/gradient of the potential:

E = \nabla V

So where the electric field vanishes, V must be constant. And V must be continuous everywhere (unless E is infinite).
 
Corneo said:
Consider a spherical conducting shell where all the charges reside on the surface. Using Gauss's Law, it can be found that the electric field inside the shell is zero. But why is the electric potential a constant? More over, why is the potential same as the potential on the surface of the shell? Please refer to the voltage plots in the following link.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

Thank you.

The relation between Electric Field and Potential is given by:

<br /> <br /> E=- \frac{dV}{dR}<br />

When E =0 , then from the above expression the potential has to constant.
Because everywhere inside the shell the electric field is zero, therefore everywhere inside it , potential is constant and same . If there are two different potentials between two different points, then due to potential difference the charges on the sphere might start moving, which is not the case when E=0.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top