Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 10 at 3:26 comment added David Z @BrainStrokePatient (I know it's been a while, sorry) In that case the superposition is already included. Specifically, when we say "the charge is producing an electric field in only one direction", superposition is how we get an electric field that only emanates in one direction. That one-direction field already takes into account the other plate's charge. So I was just warning people against using the positive charge density to calculate an electric field and also using the negative charge density to calculate a field and adding them up, because that would be double-counting.
Apr 10 at 3:21 comment added David Z @BobD Yes, that's exactly how migration of positive charge is "implemented" in a real conductor: by mobile electrons moving away from the part of the conductor that the positive charge is migrating to. (Don't forget the distinction between movement of charge and movement of the particles that carry that charge.)
Apr 8 at 21:10 comment added Bob D "The more realistic explanation is that essentially all of the charge on each plate migrates to the inside surface. " While it doesn't affect the conclusion, technically don't the mobile charges (electrons) on the left plate migrate to the outside of the plate leaving the immobile (protons) on the inside?
Mar 18, 2021 at 20:15 comment added Brain Stroke Patient I don't quite understand why we can't use superposition in the second case. If I have a dipole and I want to find the electric field in between, don't I have to use superposition even though it is true that the negative charge is the terminator for the same electric field line of the positive charge?
Jan 19, 2021 at 3:33 comment added KingLogic @drake01 they are attracted to the opposite charge on the other side.
Dec 24, 2018 at 5:22 comment added drake01 Why does all the charge migrate inside?
May 22, 2013 at 2:01 vote accept Pricklebush Tickletush
May 20, 2013 at 8:03 history edited David Z CC BY-SA 3.0
clarify again
May 20, 2013 at 7:06 history edited David Z CC BY-SA 3.0
clarify
May 20, 2013 at 6:30 history answered David Z CC BY-SA 3.0