Sfdwhf

Do my Windows system binaries contain sensitive information?

Is the theory of the category of topological spaces computable?

How Should I Define/Declare String Constants

Why didn't Eru and/or the Valar intervene when Sauron corrupted Númenor?

How to approximate rolls for potions of healing using only d6's?

How to push a box with physics engine by another object?

Is it a fallacy if someone claims they need an explanation for every word of your argument to the point where they don't understand common terms?

How do we edit a novel that's written by several people?

Find the number of ways to express 1050 as sum of consecutive integers

Word to be used for "standing with your toes pointing out"

Sometimes a banana is just a banana

Metadata API deployments are failing in Spring '19

Why can I easily sing or whistle a tune I've just heard, but not as easily reproduce it on an instrument?

Using AWS Fargate as web server

Should I choose Itemized or Standard deduction?

Why is working on the same position for more than 15 years not a red flag?

Can I retract my name from an already published manuscript?

How do Japanese speakers determine the implied topic when none has been mentioned?

How to acknowledge an embarrassing job interview, now that I work directly with the interviewer?

What to do when being responsible for data protection in your lab, yet advice is ignored?

Is my plan for fixing my water heater leak bad?

Can the Count of Monte Cristo's calculation of poison dosage be explained?

Proof by Induction - New to proofs

Why is my solution for the partial pressures of two different gases incorrect?

Charged enclosed by the sphere

“Find the net force the southern hemisphere of a uniformly charged sphere exerts on the northern hemisphere”Why $epsilon_0 = 1/(4pi k)$ instead of $epsilon_0 = 4pi k$?How does Gauss's Law imply that the electric field is zero inside a hollow sphere?Gauss's Law - Charge EnclosedElectric field from metal rod with surface chargeConfused about a question about a dielectric sphereElectric Charge enclosed in a sphere using vector calculusWhy doesn't fully integrating Gauss' law give the correct linear charge density here?Electrostatic force per unit area on a hemisphere due to its other halfHow to calculate the electric field using Gauss' s Law in this example?

4

3

$begingroup$

I'm reviewing the book "Conquering the Physics GRE" for my upcoming Physics GRE. I came across this problem which I'm having trouble with understanding. In particular, I understand the solution that the author provides but I don't understand what is wrong with my approach.

Q. The Electric field inside a sphere of radius $R$ is given by $E = E_0 z^2 hat{textbf{z}}$. What is the total charge of the sphere ?

The authors approach involving taking the divergence of the electric field to get the charge density and then integrating the density over the volume of the sphere to get charged enclosed, which in their case turns out to be $0$.

But we can also just use a concentric sphere of radius $r$ ($0 < r le R$) as a Gaussian surface and just use the integral form of Maxwell's equation to calculate the charge enclosed.

$$ oint limits_{S} vec{E} cdot dvec{S} = frac{Q_{enc}}{epsilon_0} $$

Since the area vector points in the radial direction, if we assume it makes an angle $theta$ with the Electric Field vector, and given $z = r cos(theta)$, we have

$$ Q_{enc} = epsilon_0 int limits_{0}^{pi} int limits_{0}^{2pi} E_0 r^2 cos^2(theta) r^2 sin(theta) dtheta dphi $$

$$ Q_{enc} = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} r^4 $$

If we want the charge enclosed by the sphere, we just set $r = R$, so we get

$$ Q = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} R^4 $$

which isn't zero.

I'm having trouble figuring out where I'm going wrong. Any suggestions appreciated.

electrostatics gauss-law maxwell-equations

share|cite|improve this question

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

4

3

$begingroup$

I'm reviewing the book "Conquering the Physics GRE" for my upcoming Physics GRE. I came across this problem which I'm having trouble with understanding. In particular, I understand the solution that the author provides but I don't understand what is wrong with my approach.

Q. The Electric field inside a sphere of radius $R$ is given by $E = E_0 z^2 hat{textbf{z}}$. What is the total charge of the sphere ?

The authors approach involving taking the divergence of the electric field to get the charge density and then integrating the density over the volume of the sphere to get charged enclosed, which in their case turns out to be $0$.

But we can also just use a concentric sphere of radius $r$ ($0 < r le R$) as a Gaussian surface and just use the integral form of Maxwell's equation to calculate the charge enclosed.

$$ oint limits_{S} vec{E} cdot dvec{S} = frac{Q_{enc}}{epsilon_0} $$

Since the area vector points in the radial direction, if we assume it makes an angle $theta$ with the Electric Field vector, and given $z = r cos(theta)$, we have

$$ Q_{enc} = epsilon_0 int limits_{0}^{pi} int limits_{0}^{2pi} E_0 r^2 cos^2(theta) r^2 sin(theta) dtheta dphi $$

$$ Q_{enc} = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} r^4 $$

If we want the charge enclosed by the sphere, we just set $r = R$, so we get

$$ Q = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} R^4 $$

which isn't zero.

I'm having trouble figuring out where I'm going wrong. Any suggestions appreciated.

electrostatics gauss-law maxwell-equations

share|cite|improve this question

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I'm reviewing the book "Conquering the Physics GRE" for my upcoming Physics GRE. I came across this problem which I'm having trouble with understanding. In particular, I understand the solution that the author provides but I don't understand what is wrong with my approach.

Q. The Electric field inside a sphere of radius $R$ is given by $E = E_0 z^2 hat{textbf{z}}$. What is the total charge of the sphere ?

The authors approach involving taking the divergence of the electric field to get the charge density and then integrating the density over the volume of the sphere to get charged enclosed, which in their case turns out to be $0$.

But we can also just use a concentric sphere of radius $r$ ($0 < r le R$) as a Gaussian surface and just use the integral form of Maxwell's equation to calculate the charge enclosed.

$$ oint limits_{S} vec{E} cdot dvec{S} = frac{Q_{enc}}{epsilon_0} $$

Since the area vector points in the radial direction, if we assume it makes an angle $theta$ with the Electric Field vector, and given $z = r cos(theta)$, we have

$$ Q_{enc} = epsilon_0 int limits_{0}^{pi} int limits_{0}^{2pi} E_0 r^2 cos^2(theta) r^2 sin(theta) dtheta dphi $$

$$ Q_{enc} = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} r^4 $$

If we want the charge enclosed by the sphere, we just set $r = R$, so we get

$$ Q = frac{4 pi epsilon_0 E_0}{3} R^4 $$

which isn't zero.

I'm having trouble figuring out where I'm going wrong. Any suggestions appreciated.

electrostatics gauss-law maxwell-equations

share|cite|improve this question

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this question

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|cite|improve this question

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

New contributor

timoneo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 4 hours ago

timoneotimoneo

233

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

4

$begingroup$

I think you forgot to account for $mathbf{hat{z}}$

Let $mathbf{hat{r}}$ be the normal to the surface of our sphere. If you take the route of integrating the electric field over the surface of the sphere that contains the charge, then you will be evaluating the following quantity.

$z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{hat{r}}=z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{r}/r=z^2, z/r=z^3/r$

So you will be integrating $z^3$ over the surface of the sphere centered on the origin. Since $z^3$ is an odd function the integral will vanish.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks! Indeed I forgot the $hat{z}$. FYI, I marked your answer as correct, but I don't have enough reputation to publicly upvote you, so just thanking you via this comment.
  $endgroup$
  – timoneo
  4 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I thought this question was fascinating. I don't understand where the minus sign appears to make the function odd. Shouldn't ^z and ^r point in the same direction over the entire surface of the sphere, giving a positive dot product over the entire surface?
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @timoneo: good question. Glad I could help
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @lamplamp: $mathbf{hat{z}}$ does point in the same direction at all points, but $mathbf{hat{r}}$ does not since it is normal and points out of the sphere. If this sphere was Earth, $mathbf{hat{r}}$ would point in the direction of the rocket taking off the Earth and flying to space, so on north pole $mathbf{hat{r}}$ points "up", whilst on south pole it points "down".
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks, when I read the question, I assumed that z was referencing a radial coordinate as a dummy variable to distinguish from r. From the thread here, I now believe that z was chosen to as standard Cartesian, which makes perfect sense about the function being odd.
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

There is also a nice geometrical argument for this. Since the field is $vec E=z^2hat z$, the fields lines always point along $+hat z$ and the magnitude of the field does not depend on the position in the $xy$-plane. As a result, every field line that enters the sphere must also exit the sphere, so the net flux must be $0$.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

timoneo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f464265%2fcharged-enclosed-by-the-sphere%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

4

$begingroup$

I think you forgot to account for $mathbf{hat{z}}$

Let $mathbf{hat{r}}$ be the normal to the surface of our sphere. If you take the route of integrating the electric field over the surface of the sphere that contains the charge, then you will be evaluating the following quantity.

$z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{hat{r}}=z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{r}/r=z^2, z/r=z^3/r$

So you will be integrating $z^3$ over the surface of the sphere centered on the origin. Since $z^3$ is an odd function the integral will vanish.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks! Indeed I forgot the $hat{z}$. FYI, I marked your answer as correct, but I don't have enough reputation to publicly upvote you, so just thanking you via this comment.
  $endgroup$
  – timoneo
  4 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I thought this question was fascinating. I don't understand where the minus sign appears to make the function odd. Shouldn't ^z and ^r point in the same direction over the entire surface of the sphere, giving a positive dot product over the entire surface?
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @timoneo: good question. Glad I could help
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @lamplamp: $mathbf{hat{z}}$ does point in the same direction at all points, but $mathbf{hat{r}}$ does not since it is normal and points out of the sphere. If this sphere was Earth, $mathbf{hat{r}}$ would point in the direction of the rocket taking off the Earth and flying to space, so on north pole $mathbf{hat{r}}$ points "up", whilst on south pole it points "down".
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks, when I read the question, I assumed that z was referencing a radial coordinate as a dummy variable to distinguish from r. From the thread here, I now believe that z was chosen to as standard Cartesian, which makes perfect sense about the function being odd.
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

$begingroup$

I think you forgot to account for $mathbf{hat{z}}$

Let $mathbf{hat{r}}$ be the normal to the surface of our sphere. If you take the route of integrating the electric field over the surface of the sphere that contains the charge, then you will be evaluating the following quantity.

$z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{hat{r}}=z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{r}/r=z^2, z/r=z^3/r$

So you will be integrating $z^3$ over the surface of the sphere centered on the origin. Since $z^3$ is an odd function the integral will vanish.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks! Indeed I forgot the $hat{z}$. FYI, I marked your answer as correct, but I don't have enough reputation to publicly upvote you, so just thanking you via this comment.
  $endgroup$
  – timoneo
  4 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I thought this question was fascinating. I don't understand where the minus sign appears to make the function odd. Shouldn't ^z and ^r point in the same direction over the entire surface of the sphere, giving a positive dot product over the entire surface?
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @timoneo: good question. Glad I could help
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @lamplamp: $mathbf{hat{z}}$ does point in the same direction at all points, but $mathbf{hat{r}}$ does not since it is normal and points out of the sphere. If this sphere was Earth, $mathbf{hat{r}}$ would point in the direction of the rocket taking off the Earth and flying to space, so on north pole $mathbf{hat{r}}$ points "up", whilst on south pole it points "down".
  $endgroup$
  – Cryo
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Thanks, when I read the question, I assumed that z was referencing a radial coordinate as a dummy variable to distinguish from r. From the thread here, I now believe that z was chosen to as standard Cartesian, which makes perfect sense about the function being odd.
  $endgroup$
  – lamplamp
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I think you forgot to account for $mathbf{hat{z}}$

Let $mathbf{hat{r}}$ be the normal to the surface of our sphere. If you take the route of integrating the electric field over the surface of the sphere that contains the charge, then you will be evaluating the following quantity.

$z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{hat{r}}=z^2 mathbf{hat{z}}.mathbf{r}/r=z^2, z/r=z^3/r$

So you will be integrating $z^3$ over the surface of the sphere centered on the origin. Since $z^3$ is an odd function the integral will vanish.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

answered 4 hours ago

CryoCryo

39815

2

$begingroup$

There is also a nice geometrical argument for this. Since the field is $vec E=z^2hat z$, the fields lines always point along $+hat z$ and the magnitude of the field does not depend on the position in the $xy$-plane. As a result, every field line that enters the sphere must also exit the sphere, so the net flux must be $0$.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

There is also a nice geometrical argument for this. Since the field is $vec E=z^2hat z$, the fields lines always point along $+hat z$ and the magnitude of the field does not depend on the position in the $xy$-plane. As a result, every field line that enters the sphere must also exit the sphere, so the net flux must be $0$.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

There is also a nice geometrical argument for this. Since the field is $vec E=z^2hat z$, the fields lines always point along $+hat z$ and the magnitude of the field does not depend on the position in the $xy$-plane. As a result, every field line that enters the sphere must also exit the sphere, so the net flux must be $0$.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260

answered 2 hours ago

ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

20.5k53260