Timeline for Doubt regarding the work done by macroscopic electric fields
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2023 at 14:42 | vote | accept | nickbros123 | ||
| May 22, 2023 at 13:40 | answer | added | AXensen | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 22, 2023 at 13:08 | history | edited | nickbros123 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| May 22, 2023 at 13:02 | comment | added | nickbros123 | @annav The question is basically asking the validity of the formula $(\frac{1}{2} \iiint \rho_{macro} \phi_{macro} d\tau)_{final}-(\frac{1}{2} \iiint \rho_{macro} \phi_{macro} d\tau)_{initial} $ in cases where I microscopically change the configuration; for example; battery working to charge a capacitor. Most textbooks (like griffiths) use this work only, and this bothers me. if I am wrong in the interpretation of the formula, and hence it somehow turns out to be applicable, then id like an answer for that aswell. is it really wrong to ask these two related questions | |
| May 20, 2023 at 13:15 | comment | added | anna v | Electrostatics does not work in the way you imagine. Two like larges will repulse and move away from each other. Two unlike charges will attract and move on to each other. The notion of changing a system of charges in a "fundamental way" can only apply with extra interactions. I have revoked my close choice, and cannot close again. I would choose" *Needs more focus This question currently includes multiple questions in one. It should focus on one problem only.+ | |
| May 20, 2023 at 13:11 | comment | added | anna v | then the reason for closure is that the type of charge and the material has to be defined and your question is too general . | |
| May 20, 2023 at 8:54 | comment | added | nickbros123 | @annav I think you are missing the essense of my question. I think it's well within the framework of electrostatics to ask about the work done against electrostatic forces to build a system of charges, or to shift from one system to another. It is well established fact that on changing the system only at a macroscopic level, as in moving each of these blobs of charges, we can readily subtract the 2 integrals. But in cases when one fundamentally changes things, like in the case of a capacitor, I am just asking about the validity of the formula, and if valid, how does it come mathematically | |
| May 20, 2023 at 8:50 | comment | added | nickbros123 | What do you mean isn't mainstream physics? Many textbooks treat the work done by a battery to charge a capacitor against electrostatic forces only, so what's the particular issue you are having with my question? FNH Robinson extensively treats the work done against electrostatic forces to reconfigure a system of charges, from the perspective of macroscopic quantities, but leaves out the part where one is able to change the configuration at a level that is more than macroscopic, eg, blobs of electrons travelling inside a wire which distribute themselves onto a thin conducting plate (very thin) | |
| May 20, 2023 at 8:16 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 20, 2023 at 13:13 | |||||
| May 20, 2023 at 6:11 | comment | added | nickbros123 | @annav , I am working within the domains of electrostatics. Whatever charges prescribed, they are fixed charges. If i speak about moving or shuffling charges, it is implied I'm doing so in a very slow manner. I don't know why you think I'm talking about plasma, i don't know the first thing about plasma | |
| May 20, 2023 at 6:06 | comment | added | anna v | for all the length of your post it is not clear what sample of charges you are talking about. You are basically talking about creating a plasma, i.e, an overall neutral sample with charges in motion. plasmas.org | |
| May 20, 2023 at 5:27 | history | asked | nickbros123 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |