- #1
kiwibird4
- 8
- 0
so for uniform charge densities, a point "r" from the center of a ring of charge has an
E ∝ 1/r^2
a point "r" from center of a long line of charge has an
E ∝ 1/r
and for an infinite plane, a point "r" from it where r<<length of plane has
E not dependent on r
my question was why is it that a ring of charge has an inverse square proportionality compared to a line of charge? Does the point have a stronger dependency on distance because there is "more area" of a ring then simply a line's electric field?
Also, when I think about r becoming extremely large (so the point is very far away), wouldn't the ring of charge be more like a point charge but why would the line be seen less as a point charge since it is not an inverse squared dependency but an inverse linear dependency (if that even makes any sense)
E ∝ 1/r^2
a point "r" from center of a long line of charge has an
E ∝ 1/r
and for an infinite plane, a point "r" from it where r<<length of plane has
E not dependent on r
my question was why is it that a ring of charge has an inverse square proportionality compared to a line of charge? Does the point have a stronger dependency on distance because there is "more area" of a ring then simply a line's electric field?
Also, when I think about r becoming extremely large (so the point is very far away), wouldn't the ring of charge be more like a point charge but why would the line be seen less as a point charge since it is not an inverse squared dependency but an inverse linear dependency (if that even makes any sense)