rabia 2012-10-11 01:04:05 | I have to solve a problem by using Coulumn' law given rho=rho not (1-r/R) and find Q from given expression. | |
physicsphysics 2011-10-11 07:22:32 | Does anybody have a problem by using Coulumn' law?
I used . The answer is . Can anybody explain what I am wrong?
3Danyon 2011-10-13 08:44:10 |
I made the same mistake initially. The thing is, one has to calculate the charge first and then divide by the . Otherwise you change the integrand and get the wrong numerical factor. To spell it out, the field is given by:
|
| |
phoxdie 2010-11-10 15:20:06 | Sorry to get hung up on this, but it was very confusing the first time I looked at this solution. There is a small "typo" in the solution. A factor of epsilon is dropped for no reason. | |
Kabuto Yakushi 2010-09-19 10:28:26 | Another method for solving this problem would be to take the volume integral of to solve for Q. Then to plug Q into Gauss' law.
where
plug Q into Gauss' law:
solving one gets choice B).
Yosun's solution is faster, but if using the shell method for integration doesn't come to mind, one must resort to the long method. | |
tsharky87 2009-11-06 08:46:03 | I was confused about the fact that I seemed to be getting a , so here's an explanation for those of you who were as confused as azot and I:
I was getting my r's confused in Yosun's solution, I just took and canceled away. The reason this is wrong is that the radius that you are taking the area with when multiplying by is actually . So if you set you should arrive at the solution. | |
jw111 2008-11-05 15:43:14 | in addition, if you set A=1, R=1, epsilon=1
it will be easier
then
E= 1/40
pam d 2011-09-17 16:24:27 |
nice
|
| |
gliese876d 2008-10-11 20:56:52 | hmm. I'm just wondering... I had the following formula memorized for similar situations:
E=
Where little r is the radius of the point from the center and R is the total radius of the sphere
Now using this formula I figured Q would equal
so I used this in the numerator for Q and also plugged in r= R/2 and you get
which is *close* to the right answer, but not quite... where does this standard formula fall apart in reasoning for this particular situation?
flyboy621 2010-11-02 21:12:58 |
I think you are assuming constant charge density, which is not the case here.
|
| |
hisperati 2007-10-31 20:29:18 | To find the charge we need to integrate a charge density, that is per unit volume. The answers correspond to multipliying by a surface area ( I am not talking about the left side of Guass's Law, where it is obvious surface area is correctly used). Why isn't the charge density multiplied by ?
blah22 2008-03-14 18:01:46 |
Yea I'm confused too
|
blah22 2008-03-14 18:27:59 |
Ah I see, for anyone else confused by this in the future, it's just a method of getting the volume of a sphere through integration. Divide the sphere into lots of shells of thickness dr, each with surface area .
Thanks so much Yosun!
|
flyboy621 2010-11-02 21:14:34 |
You can't just multiply the charge density by the enclosed volume because the density is not constant. You have to integrate.
|
| |
azot 2007-10-23 06:04:01 | the answer to this problem is wrong .
E shoud be equal to A*R^3/32*5
azot 2007-10-23 06:05:00 |
sorry I was wrong :) Everything is ok
|
kevinjay15 2007-10-23 18:24:01 |
ETS is never wrong.
|
| |