Electric field as gradient
About points...
We associate a certain number of points with each exercise.
When you click an exercise into a collection, this number will be taken as points for the exercise, kind of "by default".
But once the exercise is on the collection, you can edit the number of points for the exercise in the collection independently, without any effect on "points by default" as represented by the number here.
That being said... How many "default points" should you associate with an exercise upon creation?
As with difficulty, there is no straight forward and generally accepted way.
But as a guideline, we tend to give as many points by default as there are mathematical steps to do in the exercise.
Again, very vague... But the number should kind of represent the "work" required.
When you click an exercise into a collection, this number will be taken as points for the exercise, kind of "by default".
But once the exercise is on the collection, you can edit the number of points for the exercise in the collection independently, without any effect on "points by default" as represented by the number here.
That being said... How many "default points" should you associate with an exercise upon creation?
As with difficulty, there is no straight forward and generally accepted way.
But as a guideline, we tend to give as many points by default as there are mathematical steps to do in the exercise.
Again, very vague... But the number should kind of represent the "work" required.
About difficulty...
We associate a certain difficulty with each exercise.
When you click an exercise into a collection, this number will be taken as difficulty for the exercise, kind of "by default".
But once the exercise is on the collection, you can edit its difficulty in the collection independently, without any effect on the "difficulty by default" here.
Why we use chess pieces? Well... we like chess, we like playing around with \(\LaTeX\)-fonts, we wanted symbols that need less space than six stars in a table-column... But in your layouts, you are of course free to indicate the difficulty of the exercise the way you want.
That being said... How "difficult" is an exercise? It depends on many factors, like what was being taught etc.
In physics exercises, we try to follow this pattern:
Level 1 - One formula (one you would find in a reference book) is enough to solve the exercise. Example exercise
Level 2 - Two formulas are needed, it's possible to compute an "in-between" solution, i.e. no algebraic equation needed. Example exercise
Level 3 - "Chain-computations" like on level 2, but 3+ calculations. Still, no equations, i.e. you are not forced to solve it in an algebraic manner. Example exercise
Level 4 - Exercise needs to be solved by algebraic equations, not possible to calculate numerical "in-between" results. Example exercise
Level 5 -
Level 6 -
When you click an exercise into a collection, this number will be taken as difficulty for the exercise, kind of "by default".
But once the exercise is on the collection, you can edit its difficulty in the collection independently, without any effect on the "difficulty by default" here.
Why we use chess pieces? Well... we like chess, we like playing around with \(\LaTeX\)-fonts, we wanted symbols that need less space than six stars in a table-column... But in your layouts, you are of course free to indicate the difficulty of the exercise the way you want.
That being said... How "difficult" is an exercise? It depends on many factors, like what was being taught etc.
In physics exercises, we try to follow this pattern:
Level 1 - One formula (one you would find in a reference book) is enough to solve the exercise. Example exercise
Level 2 - Two formulas are needed, it's possible to compute an "in-between" solution, i.e. no algebraic equation needed. Example exercise
Level 3 - "Chain-computations" like on level 2, but 3+ calculations. Still, no equations, i.e. you are not forced to solve it in an algebraic manner. Example exercise
Level 4 - Exercise needs to be solved by algebraic equations, not possible to calculate numerical "in-between" results. Example exercise
Level 5 -
Level 6 -
Question
Solution
Short
Video
\(\LaTeX\)
No explanation / solution video to this exercise has yet been created.
Visit our YouTube-Channel to see solutions to other exercises.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel, like the videos and leave comments!
Visit our YouTube-Channel to see solutions to other exercises.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel, like the videos and leave comments!
Exercise:
Show that the electric field can be derived as the gradient of the corresponding potential for abcliste abc a spherical charge distribution with Vx y z k_C fracQr k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ abc a linear charge distribution along z with Vx y z fraclambdapi varepsilon_ lnfracr_r fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ abcliste
Solution:
abcliste abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ right -k_C Q fracpartialpartial x left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ -k_C Q frac- left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ x k_C Q fracxleft x^+y^+z^ right^/ k_C Q fracxr^ The y and z components can be found in the same way. The electric field vector can thus be written as vec Ex y z k_C fracQr^ pmatrix x y z pmatrix With vec r pmatrix x y z pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr this is the same as Evec r k_C fracQr^ hat r which is the vector expression for the field at distance r from a spherical charge distribution Q. abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right -fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracsqrtx^+y^r_ r_ frac- left x^+y^ right^-/ x fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracxx^+y^ The y component can be derived in the same way: E_y fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracyx^+y^ For the z component we find E_z -fracpartial Vx y zpartial z -fracpartialpartial z left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right since the potential does not dep on z. abcliste With vec r pmatrix x y pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr we can write the electric field vector at a distance r from the linear charge distribution as vec Er fraclambdapivarepsilon_ r hat r which corresponds to the expected result i.e. a field perpicular to the direction of the linear charge distribution i.e. vec r perp hat z which decreases with /r.
Show that the electric field can be derived as the gradient of the corresponding potential for abcliste abc a spherical charge distribution with Vx y z k_C fracQr k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ abc a linear charge distribution along z with Vx y z fraclambdapi varepsilon_ lnfracr_r fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ abcliste
Solution:
abcliste abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ right -k_C Q fracpartialpartial x left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ -k_C Q frac- left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ x k_C Q fracxleft x^+y^+z^ right^/ k_C Q fracxr^ The y and z components can be found in the same way. The electric field vector can thus be written as vec Ex y z k_C fracQr^ pmatrix x y z pmatrix With vec r pmatrix x y z pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr this is the same as Evec r k_C fracQr^ hat r which is the vector expression for the field at distance r from a spherical charge distribution Q. abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right -fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracsqrtx^+y^r_ r_ frac- left x^+y^ right^-/ x fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracxx^+y^ The y component can be derived in the same way: E_y fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracyx^+y^ For the z component we find E_z -fracpartial Vx y zpartial z -fracpartialpartial z left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right since the potential does not dep on z. abcliste With vec r pmatrix x y pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr we can write the electric field vector at a distance r from the linear charge distribution as vec Er fraclambdapivarepsilon_ r hat r which corresponds to the expected result i.e. a field perpicular to the direction of the linear charge distribution i.e. vec r perp hat z which decreases with /r.
Meta Information
Exercise:
Show that the electric field can be derived as the gradient of the corresponding potential for abcliste abc a spherical charge distribution with Vx y z k_C fracQr k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ abc a linear charge distribution along z with Vx y z fraclambdapi varepsilon_ lnfracr_r fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ abcliste
Solution:
abcliste abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ right -k_C Q fracpartialpartial x left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ -k_C Q frac- left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ x k_C Q fracxleft x^+y^+z^ right^/ k_C Q fracxr^ The y and z components can be found in the same way. The electric field vector can thus be written as vec Ex y z k_C fracQr^ pmatrix x y z pmatrix With vec r pmatrix x y z pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr this is the same as Evec r k_C fracQr^ hat r which is the vector expression for the field at distance r from a spherical charge distribution Q. abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right -fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracsqrtx^+y^r_ r_ frac- left x^+y^ right^-/ x fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracxx^+y^ The y component can be derived in the same way: E_y fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracyx^+y^ For the z component we find E_z -fracpartial Vx y zpartial z -fracpartialpartial z left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right since the potential does not dep on z. abcliste With vec r pmatrix x y pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr we can write the electric field vector at a distance r from the linear charge distribution as vec Er fraclambdapivarepsilon_ r hat r which corresponds to the expected result i.e. a field perpicular to the direction of the linear charge distribution i.e. vec r perp hat z which decreases with /r.
Show that the electric field can be derived as the gradient of the corresponding potential for abcliste abc a spherical charge distribution with Vx y z k_C fracQr k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ abc a linear charge distribution along z with Vx y z fraclambdapi varepsilon_ lnfracr_r fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ abcliste
Solution:
abcliste abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left k_C fracQsqrtx^+y^+z^ right -k_C Q fracpartialpartial x left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ -k_C Q frac- left x^ + y^ + z^ right^-/ x k_C Q fracxleft x^+y^+z^ right^/ k_C Q fracxr^ The y and z components can be found in the same way. The electric field vector can thus be written as vec Ex y z k_C fracQr^ pmatrix x y z pmatrix With vec r pmatrix x y z pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr this is the same as Evec r k_C fracQr^ hat r which is the vector expression for the field at distance r from a spherical charge distribution Q. abc For the x component we find E_x -fracpartial Vx y zpartial x -fracpartialpartial x left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right -fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracsqrtx^+y^r_ r_ frac- left x^+y^ right^-/ x fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracxx^+y^ The y component can be derived in the same way: E_y fraclambdapivarepsilon_ fracyx^+y^ For the z component we find E_z -fracpartial Vx y zpartial z -fracpartialpartial z left fraclambdapivarepsilon_ lnfracr_sqrtx^+y^ right since the potential does not dep on z. abcliste With vec r pmatrix x y pmatrix and hat r fracvec rr we can write the electric field vector at a distance r from the linear charge distribution as vec Er fraclambdapivarepsilon_ r hat r which corresponds to the expected result i.e. a field perpicular to the direction of the linear charge distribution i.e. vec r perp hat z which decreases with /r.
Contained in these collections:

