Potential by Assembling Charges The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraPotential difference between Earth's surface and 2 meters abovePotential of a uniformly charged hollow sphereElectric potential inside a conductorElectric field and electric scalar potential of two perpendicular wiresboundary condition of electrical fieldElectric Potential due to Sphere when cavity is at arbitrary positionSystem of point charges, Potential related questionIs this process to compute the electrostatic potential energy a valid one?Do charges move to the outer surface of a conductor to minimize the potential energy?Can Potential Energy be found by Energy Density?

How to handle characters who are more educated than the author?

Can we generate random numbers using irrational numbers like π and e?

Why doesn't shell automatically fix "useless use of cat"?

Identify 80s or 90s comics with ripped creatures (not dwarves)

What's the point in a preamp?

What can I do if neighbor is blocking my solar panels intentionally?

What was the last x86 CPU that did not have the x87 floating-point unit built in?

Didn't get enough time to take a Coding Test - what to do now?

ELI5: Why do they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why do they call it low cost?

How to read αἱμύλιος or when to aspirate

Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?

What is the padding with red substance inside of steak packaging?

Presidential Pardon

Variable with quotation marks "$()"

Does Parliament need to approve the new Brexit delay to 31 October 2019?

Loose spokes after only a few rides

Simulating Exploding Dice

Can the DM override racial traits?

Do ℕ, mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN effectively differ, and is there a "canonical" specification of the naturals?

Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?

What information about me do stores get via my credit card?

Is it ethical to upload a automatically generated paper to a non peer-reviewed site as part of a larger research?

"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?

Are there continuous functions who are the same in an interval but differ in at least one other point?



Potential by Assembling Charges



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraPotential difference between Earth's surface and 2 meters abovePotential of a uniformly charged hollow sphereElectric potential inside a conductorElectric field and electric scalar potential of two perpendicular wiresboundary condition of electrical fieldElectric Potential due to Sphere when cavity is at arbitrary positionSystem of point charges, Potential related questionIs this process to compute the electrostatic potential energy a valid one?Do charges move to the outer surface of a conductor to minimize the potential energy?Can Potential Energy be found by Energy Density?










2












$begingroup$


For finding electric potential energy of a uniformly charged sphere, we can assemble the sphere by brining charges from infinity to that point. So to make a uniformly charged sphere of radius $R$ and total charge $Q$, at some instant, charge will be assembled up to a certain radius $x$.
In order to find potential of this sphere at the surface, why is my approach giving different answers?



Approach 1:



$$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$



$$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
Potential at the surface would be $$V = fracq4 pi epsilon_0 x = fracQ x^24 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



Approach 2:
$$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$
$$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
$$E = fracQ x4 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$ (From Gauss' Law)



Potential at the surface would be $$V = -intvecE cdot vecdx = -fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R^3 int_0^xxdx = -fracQ x^28 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



Why is the answer different in both the cases?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    For finding electric potential energy of a uniformly charged sphere, we can assemble the sphere by brining charges from infinity to that point. So to make a uniformly charged sphere of radius $R$ and total charge $Q$, at some instant, charge will be assembled up to a certain radius $x$.
    In order to find potential of this sphere at the surface, why is my approach giving different answers?



    Approach 1:



    $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$



    $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
    Potential at the surface would be $$V = fracq4 pi epsilon_0 x = fracQ x^24 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



    Approach 2:
    $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$
    $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
    $$E = fracQ x4 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$ (From Gauss' Law)



    Potential at the surface would be $$V = -intvecE cdot vecdx = -fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R^3 int_0^xxdx = -fracQ x^28 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



    Why is the answer different in both the cases?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      For finding electric potential energy of a uniformly charged sphere, we can assemble the sphere by brining charges from infinity to that point. So to make a uniformly charged sphere of radius $R$ and total charge $Q$, at some instant, charge will be assembled up to a certain radius $x$.
      In order to find potential of this sphere at the surface, why is my approach giving different answers?



      Approach 1:



      $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$



      $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
      Potential at the surface would be $$V = fracq4 pi epsilon_0 x = fracQ x^24 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



      Approach 2:
      $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$
      $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
      $$E = fracQ x4 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$ (From Gauss' Law)



      Potential at the surface would be $$V = -intvecE cdot vecdx = -fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R^3 int_0^xxdx = -fracQ x^28 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



      Why is the answer different in both the cases?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      For finding electric potential energy of a uniformly charged sphere, we can assemble the sphere by brining charges from infinity to that point. So to make a uniformly charged sphere of radius $R$ and total charge $Q$, at some instant, charge will be assembled up to a certain radius $x$.
      In order to find potential of this sphere at the surface, why is my approach giving different answers?



      Approach 1:



      $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$



      $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
      Potential at the surface would be $$V = fracq4 pi epsilon_0 x = fracQ x^24 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



      Approach 2:
      $$rho = frac3Q4 pi R^3$$
      $$q = frac43 pi x^3 rho = Q fracx^3R^3$$
      $$E = fracQ x4 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$ (From Gauss' Law)



      Potential at the surface would be $$V = -intvecE cdot vecdx = -fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R^3 int_0^xxdx = -fracQ x^28 pi epsilon_0 R^3$$



      Why is the answer different in both the cases?







      electrostatics potential






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 2 days ago







      Kushal T.

















      asked 2 days ago









      Kushal T.Kushal T.

      557




      557




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Two cases described are completely different. In first case you find the true potential of the sphere by taking the charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere. In another case you take the charge from the middle of the sphere or the centre of the sphere to the surface of the sphere which is not the potential of the sphere surface. The potential of the sphere surface can be described as the work needed to push a positive charge from infinity to a to the surface or the energy stored to push the charge from the the surface towards the infinity so you can see in your second case you are not calculating the potential of the surface of the sphere. SHORT NOTE:- You can find the potential at any point by finding the difference of potential at that point and any other point whose the potential is zero now at the centre of the the sphere you don't have the potential as 0. See this:http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/semester2/d06_potential_spheres.html






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$




















            2












            $begingroup$

            Approach 2 is wrong. You didn't take into account the corresponding limits for potential. Potential at centre of sphere is not zero!! The expression is V(x)-V(0) instead of V(x).... Find potential at surface by integrating for electric field outside sphere from X to infinity V(infinity)=0. So Then if you wish you can find V(x) by integrating from x=x to any general x=y(






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
              $endgroup$
              – Kushal T.
              2 days ago



















            1












            $begingroup$

            The first thing to note is that the electric potential at a point is entirely different to the electric potential energy of an assembly of charges.

            I have assumed that you are finding the potential at a point and you have used two definitions of the zero of electric potential, one at infinity and the other at the centre of the charge distribution.



            Using Gauss's law the graph of electric field strength $E(x)$ against distance from the centre of the charge distribution $x$ looks something like this.



            enter image description here



            The area under the graph $int E,dx$ is related to the change in potential.



            In essence what you have done is found that areas $A$ and $B$ are not the same.



            PS You may well have met a similar graph with $E(r)$ negative and labelled $g(r)$ when discussing the gravitational field due to the earth and the gravitational field strength inside the Earth?






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













              Your Answer








              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
              );



              );













              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f471655%2fpotential-by-assembling-charges%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2












              $begingroup$

              Two cases described are completely different. In first case you find the true potential of the sphere by taking the charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere. In another case you take the charge from the middle of the sphere or the centre of the sphere to the surface of the sphere which is not the potential of the sphere surface. The potential of the sphere surface can be described as the work needed to push a positive charge from infinity to a to the surface or the energy stored to push the charge from the the surface towards the infinity so you can see in your second case you are not calculating the potential of the surface of the sphere. SHORT NOTE:- You can find the potential at any point by finding the difference of potential at that point and any other point whose the potential is zero now at the centre of the the sphere you don't have the potential as 0. See this:http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/semester2/d06_potential_spheres.html






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$

















                2












                $begingroup$

                Two cases described are completely different. In first case you find the true potential of the sphere by taking the charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere. In another case you take the charge from the middle of the sphere or the centre of the sphere to the surface of the sphere which is not the potential of the sphere surface. The potential of the sphere surface can be described as the work needed to push a positive charge from infinity to a to the surface or the energy stored to push the charge from the the surface towards the infinity so you can see in your second case you are not calculating the potential of the surface of the sphere. SHORT NOTE:- You can find the potential at any point by finding the difference of potential at that point and any other point whose the potential is zero now at the centre of the the sphere you don't have the potential as 0. See this:http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/semester2/d06_potential_spheres.html






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  Two cases described are completely different. In first case you find the true potential of the sphere by taking the charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere. In another case you take the charge from the middle of the sphere or the centre of the sphere to the surface of the sphere which is not the potential of the sphere surface. The potential of the sphere surface can be described as the work needed to push a positive charge from infinity to a to the surface or the energy stored to push the charge from the the surface towards the infinity so you can see in your second case you are not calculating the potential of the surface of the sphere. SHORT NOTE:- You can find the potential at any point by finding the difference of potential at that point and any other point whose the potential is zero now at the centre of the the sphere you don't have the potential as 0. See this:http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/semester2/d06_potential_spheres.html






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  Two cases described are completely different. In first case you find the true potential of the sphere by taking the charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere. In another case you take the charge from the middle of the sphere or the centre of the sphere to the surface of the sphere which is not the potential of the sphere surface. The potential of the sphere surface can be described as the work needed to push a positive charge from infinity to a to the surface or the energy stored to push the charge from the the surface towards the infinity so you can see in your second case you are not calculating the potential of the surface of the sphere. SHORT NOTE:- You can find the potential at any point by finding the difference of potential at that point and any other point whose the potential is zero now at the centre of the the sphere you don't have the potential as 0. See this:http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/semester2/d06_potential_spheres.html







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited 2 days ago

























                  answered 2 days ago









                  Nobody recognizeableNobody recognizeable

                  672617




                  672617





















                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      Approach 2 is wrong. You didn't take into account the corresponding limits for potential. Potential at centre of sphere is not zero!! The expression is V(x)-V(0) instead of V(x).... Find potential at surface by integrating for electric field outside sphere from X to infinity V(infinity)=0. So Then if you wish you can find V(x) by integrating from x=x to any general x=y(






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kushal T.
                        2 days ago
















                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      Approach 2 is wrong. You didn't take into account the corresponding limits for potential. Potential at centre of sphere is not zero!! The expression is V(x)-V(0) instead of V(x).... Find potential at surface by integrating for electric field outside sphere from X to infinity V(infinity)=0. So Then if you wish you can find V(x) by integrating from x=x to any general x=y(






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kushal T.
                        2 days ago














                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      Approach 2 is wrong. You didn't take into account the corresponding limits for potential. Potential at centre of sphere is not zero!! The expression is V(x)-V(0) instead of V(x).... Find potential at surface by integrating for electric field outside sphere from X to infinity V(infinity)=0. So Then if you wish you can find V(x) by integrating from x=x to any general x=y(






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      Approach 2 is wrong. You didn't take into account the corresponding limits for potential. Potential at centre of sphere is not zero!! The expression is V(x)-V(0) instead of V(x).... Find potential at surface by integrating for electric field outside sphere from X to infinity V(infinity)=0. So Then if you wish you can find V(x) by integrating from x=x to any general x=y(







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered 2 days ago









                      TojrahTojrah

                      2207




                      2207







                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kushal T.
                        2 days ago













                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kushal T.
                        2 days ago








                      1




                      1




                      $begingroup$
                      You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Kushal T.
                      2 days ago





                      $begingroup$
                      You're right, thanks. We can use the fact that potential difference between centre of sphere and infinity is $-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R$, and so the answer can be difference between my answer in approach two and the potential at the centre of the sphere, that is $$-frac3Q8 pi epsilon_0 R - ( - fracQ8 pi epsilon_0 R) = boxed-fracQ4 pi epsilon_0 R$$ and so we are done.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Kushal T.
                      2 days ago












                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      The first thing to note is that the electric potential at a point is entirely different to the electric potential energy of an assembly of charges.

                      I have assumed that you are finding the potential at a point and you have used two definitions of the zero of electric potential, one at infinity and the other at the centre of the charge distribution.



                      Using Gauss's law the graph of electric field strength $E(x)$ against distance from the centre of the charge distribution $x$ looks something like this.



                      enter image description here



                      The area under the graph $int E,dx$ is related to the change in potential.



                      In essence what you have done is found that areas $A$ and $B$ are not the same.



                      PS You may well have met a similar graph with $E(r)$ negative and labelled $g(r)$ when discussing the gravitational field due to the earth and the gravitational field strength inside the Earth?






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$

















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        The first thing to note is that the electric potential at a point is entirely different to the electric potential energy of an assembly of charges.

                        I have assumed that you are finding the potential at a point and you have used two definitions of the zero of electric potential, one at infinity and the other at the centre of the charge distribution.



                        Using Gauss's law the graph of electric field strength $E(x)$ against distance from the centre of the charge distribution $x$ looks something like this.



                        enter image description here



                        The area under the graph $int E,dx$ is related to the change in potential.



                        In essence what you have done is found that areas $A$ and $B$ are not the same.



                        PS You may well have met a similar graph with $E(r)$ negative and labelled $g(r)$ when discussing the gravitational field due to the earth and the gravitational field strength inside the Earth?






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$















                          1












                          1








                          1





                          $begingroup$

                          The first thing to note is that the electric potential at a point is entirely different to the electric potential energy of an assembly of charges.

                          I have assumed that you are finding the potential at a point and you have used two definitions of the zero of electric potential, one at infinity and the other at the centre of the charge distribution.



                          Using Gauss's law the graph of electric field strength $E(x)$ against distance from the centre of the charge distribution $x$ looks something like this.



                          enter image description here



                          The area under the graph $int E,dx$ is related to the change in potential.



                          In essence what you have done is found that areas $A$ and $B$ are not the same.



                          PS You may well have met a similar graph with $E(r)$ negative and labelled $g(r)$ when discussing the gravitational field due to the earth and the gravitational field strength inside the Earth?






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          The first thing to note is that the electric potential at a point is entirely different to the electric potential energy of an assembly of charges.

                          I have assumed that you are finding the potential at a point and you have used two definitions of the zero of electric potential, one at infinity and the other at the centre of the charge distribution.



                          Using Gauss's law the graph of electric field strength $E(x)$ against distance from the centre of the charge distribution $x$ looks something like this.



                          enter image description here



                          The area under the graph $int E,dx$ is related to the change in potential.



                          In essence what you have done is found that areas $A$ and $B$ are not the same.



                          PS You may well have met a similar graph with $E(r)$ negative and labelled $g(r)$ when discussing the gravitational field due to the earth and the gravitational field strength inside the Earth?







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered 2 days ago









                          FarcherFarcher

                          52.1k340110




                          52.1k340110



























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded
















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f471655%2fpotential-by-assembling-charges%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

                              Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

                              Where does the image of a data connector as a sharp metal spike originate from?Where does the concept of infected people turning into zombies only after death originate from?Where does the motif of a reanimated human head originate?Where did the notion that Dragons could speak originate?Where does the archetypal image of the 'Grey' alien come from?Where did the suffix '-Man' originate?Where does the notion of being injured or killed by an illusion originate?Where did the term “sophont” originate?Where does the trope of magic spells being driven by advanced technology originate from?Where did the term “the living impaired” originate?