Why is this 0? Help Gauss's law

  • Thread starter Thread starter flyingpig
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gauss's law Law
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric field around a charged metal rod. It is established that the electric field inside a conducting rod is zero because all charge resides on the surface, while an insulating rod would have a different charge distribution. The participants clarify that the equations initially used were for insulating materials, not conductors, leading to confusion. The importance of using Gauss's law to analyze the electric field in relation to the geometry of the conductor is emphasized. Ultimately, the key takeaway is that the electric field within a conducting rod is zero due to the nature of charge distribution in conductors.
flyingpig
Messages
2,574
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



A long straight metal rod has a radius of 5.00cm and a charge per unit length of 30.0nC/m. Find the electric field

a) 3.00cm

The Attempt at a Solution



It says a) = 0

I did some math and I got

2k\frac{\lambda}{r}

The rod is solid, so should a E-field be radially outward from its symmetrical axis?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am assuming that, what you wrote as, "the electric field a) 3.00cm" means "the electric field at 3.00cm from the center of the wire"


Answer to this question first: If you have a conducting sphere, carrying a charge say Q, than what is the electric field at a point inside it??
 
first check theory on electric field inside conductors.
 
Mandeep Deka said:
I am assuming that, what you wrote as, "the electric field a) 3.00cm" means "the electric field at 3.00cm from the center of the wire"


Answer to this question first: If you have a conducting sphere, carrying a charge say Q, than what is the electric field at a point inside it??

k\frac{q}{a^3}r for a < r
 
it is a metal rod. so all the charge would reside on the surface only, none can stay in the bulk.

so the field inside the rod is zero.
 
flyingpig said:
k\frac{q}{a^3}r for a < r

its for symmetrical charge distribution throughout volume. metals can't have that, all of their charge resides on surface! Can you tell why?

and i believe it must be "r<a"
 
graphene said:
it is a metal rod. so all the charge would reside on the surface only, none can stay in the bulk.

so the field inside the rod is zero.

So, but a metal sphere can too? Isn't that what my equation is?

Oh wait, I think I get it. The key here is that my equation is for an insulating sphere, not a conducting one. Hence.
 
flyingpig said:
So, but a metal sphere can too? Isn't that what my equation is?

Oh wait, I think I get it. The key here is that my equation is for an insulating sphere, not a conducting one. Hence.

Yes now you're right
 
cupid.callin said:
Yes now you're right

If this was not a "metal" rod, or "insulating rod", then my numbers in the above would be right, right?
 
  • #10
i can't get you
 
  • #11
cupid.callin said:
i can't get you

If it is insulating, all the charges would be stuck and won't be all on the surface
 
  • #12
flyingpig said:
k\frac{q}{a^3}r for a < r

If you are saying that this formula is for insulating sphere then you are right!

And also for the explanation, the charges will not move to the surface!

can you find the same for insulating cylinder?
 
  • #13
flyingpig said:
k\frac{q}{a^3}r for r<a

If you are saying that this formula is for insulating sphere then you are right!

And also for the explanation, the charges will not move to the surface!

can you find the same for insulating cylinder?
just draw a gaussian surface with r < radius of cylinder and coaxial with cylinder and use gauss theorm
 
Back
Top