Field of a uniformly charged disk: integration question( Legendre Generating Function) Off axis Electric Potential from an insulated diskUnderstanding Calculus Notation in PhysicsWhy is this integral for a uniform electric field of a charged plate not evaluating correctly?Calculation of a net electric field for a charged ring - weird integrationElectric field of infinite sheetHow to recover the potential field from Green's function and Poisson's equation for a point charge

Why didn't Thatcher give Hong Kong to Taiwan?

Do we know the problems the University of Manchester's Transistor Computer was intended to solve?

What is the most likely cause of short, quick, and useless reviews?

In chocolate terminology, what is the name of thinly sliced leaf-shaped toppings made from hot, smooth chocolate, used to form flower petals?

Given a specific computer system, is it possible to estimate the actual precise run time of a piece of Assembly code

What is the maximal acceptable delay between pilot's input and flight control surface actuation?

Why do old games use flashing as means of showing damage?

Strange LockTime values in Electrum transactions?

Why don't they build airplanes from 3D printer plastic?

Lumix G7: Raw photos only in 1920x1440, no higher res available

Can my UK debt be collected because I have to return to US?

Does secure hashing imply secure symmetric encryption?

Field of a uniformly charged disk: integration question

Is there anything in the universe that cannot be compressed?

I have two helper functions that are the exact same, one executes and one doesn't. How come?

Meaning of "educating the ice"

Why would a Intel 8080 chip be destroyed if +12 V is connected before -5 V?

My boss says "This will help us better view the utilization of your services." Does this mean my job is ending in this organisation?

Plotting level sets of the form f(x,y,c)==0

Function of the separated, individual solar cells on Telstar 1 and 2? Why were they "special"?

How to check status of Wi-Fi adapter through command line?

Which is the best password hashing algorithm in .NET Core?

Does immunity to non magical damage negate sneak attack damage?

Is mathematics truth?



Field of a uniformly charged disk: integration question


( Legendre Generating Function) Off axis Electric Potential from an insulated diskUnderstanding Calculus Notation in PhysicsWhy is this integral for a uniform electric field of a charged plate not evaluating correctly?Calculation of a net electric field for a charged ring - weird integrationElectric field of infinite sheetHow to recover the potential field from Green's function and Poisson's equation for a point charge






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2












$begingroup$


In my book (University Physics by Young and Freedman), during solving the common example of finding the electric field along the x-axis from a uniformly charged disk, they arrive at this differential expression:




$$dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




Then they say:




To find the total field due to all the rings, we integrate $dE_x$ over $r$ from $r=0$ to $r=R$ (not from $-R$ to $R$):



$$E_x = int_0^R 1 over 4piepsilon_0(2pisigma r dr)x over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




I am confused as to how they arrived at this line. The right hand side suggests that they integrated both sides of the differential equation with a definite integral, but if that were the case, the left hand side would have been



$$int_0^R dE_x = [E_x]_0^R = R - 0 = R$$



Instead, it looks like they integrated the left hand side of the differential equation with an indefinite integral, so they would get



$$int dE_x = E_x$$



Certainly, integrating one side with an indefinite integral and the other side with a definite integral cannot be a valid step because you are not doing the same thing to both sides.



How can their result be rigorously justified and what is wrong with my reasoning?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
    $endgroup$
    – DanDan0101
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago


















2












$begingroup$


In my book (University Physics by Young and Freedman), during solving the common example of finding the electric field along the x-axis from a uniformly charged disk, they arrive at this differential expression:




$$dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




Then they say:




To find the total field due to all the rings, we integrate $dE_x$ over $r$ from $r=0$ to $r=R$ (not from $-R$ to $R$):



$$E_x = int_0^R 1 over 4piepsilon_0(2pisigma r dr)x over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




I am confused as to how they arrived at this line. The right hand side suggests that they integrated both sides of the differential equation with a definite integral, but if that were the case, the left hand side would have been



$$int_0^R dE_x = [E_x]_0^R = R - 0 = R$$



Instead, it looks like they integrated the left hand side of the differential equation with an indefinite integral, so they would get



$$int dE_x = E_x$$



Certainly, integrating one side with an indefinite integral and the other side with a definite integral cannot be a valid step because you are not doing the same thing to both sides.



How can their result be rigorously justified and what is wrong with my reasoning?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
    $endgroup$
    – DanDan0101
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$


In my book (University Physics by Young and Freedman), during solving the common example of finding the electric field along the x-axis from a uniformly charged disk, they arrive at this differential expression:




$$dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




Then they say:




To find the total field due to all the rings, we integrate $dE_x$ over $r$ from $r=0$ to $r=R$ (not from $-R$ to $R$):



$$E_x = int_0^R 1 over 4piepsilon_0(2pisigma r dr)x over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




I am confused as to how they arrived at this line. The right hand side suggests that they integrated both sides of the differential equation with a definite integral, but if that were the case, the left hand side would have been



$$int_0^R dE_x = [E_x]_0^R = R - 0 = R$$



Instead, it looks like they integrated the left hand side of the differential equation with an indefinite integral, so they would get



$$int dE_x = E_x$$



Certainly, integrating one side with an indefinite integral and the other side with a definite integral cannot be a valid step because you are not doing the same thing to both sides.



How can their result be rigorously justified and what is wrong with my reasoning?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




In my book (University Physics by Young and Freedman), during solving the common example of finding the electric field along the x-axis from a uniformly charged disk, they arrive at this differential expression:




$$dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




Then they say:




To find the total field due to all the rings, we integrate $dE_x$ over $r$ from $r=0$ to $r=R$ (not from $-R$ to $R$):



$$E_x = int_0^R 1 over 4piepsilon_0(2pisigma r dr)x over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$




I am confused as to how they arrived at this line. The right hand side suggests that they integrated both sides of the differential equation with a definite integral, but if that were the case, the left hand side would have been



$$int_0^R dE_x = [E_x]_0^R = R - 0 = R$$



Instead, it looks like they integrated the left hand side of the differential equation with an indefinite integral, so they would get



$$int dE_x = E_x$$



Certainly, integrating one side with an indefinite integral and the other side with a definite integral cannot be a valid step because you are not doing the same thing to both sides.



How can their result be rigorously justified and what is wrong with my reasoning?







electrostatics electric-fields charge integration






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 8 hours ago









Aaron Stevens

22.2k4 gold badges41 silver badges78 bronze badges




22.2k4 gold badges41 silver badges78 bronze badges










asked 8 hours ago









user109923user109923

152 bronze badges




152 bronze badges














  • $begingroup$
    You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
    $endgroup$
    – DanDan0101
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago

















  • $begingroup$
    You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
    $endgroup$
    – DanDan0101
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago
















$begingroup$
You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
$endgroup$
– DanDan0101
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
You're integrating with dE, not dr, on the left hand side, so the limits of integration can't be the same.
$endgroup$
– DanDan0101
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
$endgroup$
– user109923
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
Good point. I guess the limits of integration should be the electric field at point $r=0$ and at point $r=R$? $int_E_x(0)^E_x(R) dE_x = E_x(R) - E_x(0)$ This still doesn't make sense to me.
$endgroup$
– user109923
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
$endgroup$
– user109923
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$ represents the field component at the point due to a ring.
$endgroup$
– user109923
7 hours ago












$begingroup$
...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
$endgroup$
– user109923
7 hours ago





$begingroup$
...and that $vecE=E_xhati$.
$endgroup$
– user109923
7 hours ago











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3













$begingroup$

The left hand integral limits should be with respect to the field you get as you add up the contributions to the field due to each charged ring. Therefore, it should start at $0$ and end with the final field. i.e.
$$int_0^E_xtext dE_x' = int_0^R1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$



Trivially, the integral on the left side is just the total field $E_x$.




Seeing some of your comments, you seemed to be confused as to what $r$ and $R$ actually represent. It looks like $x$ is the constant distance between the center of the disk and the point at which you are calculating the field at. $r$ is the radius of one of the rings of thickness $text dr$, and $R$ is the radius of the entire disk. Note that you are not determining the field at $r$, since $r$ is not a position in this case.



Your differential relation
$$text dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2=alpha(r),text dr$$
is essentially telling you each ring of radius $r$ and thickness $text dr$ contributes to the field an amount $alpha(r),text dr$. It makes sense that we just need to add up (integrate) all of these values (right integral) to determine the total field (left integral).






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
    $endgroup$
    – R.W. Bird
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    4 hours ago


















0













$begingroup$


But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$
represents the field component at the point due to a ring




$E_x(r)$ is a poor notation here since it certainly looks like the $x$ component of the electric field as a function of the radial coordinate $r$. Further, it is clear from the integral that $E_x = E_x(x)$.



Here, $dE_x$ or $dE_x|_r$ is the contribution to the total electric field (at coordinate $x$ on the $x$-axis) due an infinitesimal ring of charge between $r$ and $r + dr$.



If it helps, consider the approximation by finite rings of charge located between $r$ and $r + Delta r$. Let there be $N$ such rings such that



$$Delta r = fracRN$$



and



$$r_n = (n-1)Delta r$$



To find the total electric field due to the contributions $E_x,n$ from the $N$ rings making up the disk, we simply sum the contributions (linearity of electric field).



$$E_x = sum_n=1^NE_x,n$$



In the limit $Nrightarrowinfty$, the contributions become infinitesimal $E_x,nrightarrow dE_x|_r$, and the sum becomes an integral.






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%2f499914%2ffield-of-a-uniformly-charged-disk-integration-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3













    $begingroup$

    The left hand integral limits should be with respect to the field you get as you add up the contributions to the field due to each charged ring. Therefore, it should start at $0$ and end with the final field. i.e.
    $$int_0^E_xtext dE_x' = int_0^R1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$



    Trivially, the integral on the left side is just the total field $E_x$.




    Seeing some of your comments, you seemed to be confused as to what $r$ and $R$ actually represent. It looks like $x$ is the constant distance between the center of the disk and the point at which you are calculating the field at. $r$ is the radius of one of the rings of thickness $text dr$, and $R$ is the radius of the entire disk. Note that you are not determining the field at $r$, since $r$ is not a position in this case.



    Your differential relation
    $$text dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2=alpha(r),text dr$$
    is essentially telling you each ring of radius $r$ and thickness $text dr$ contributes to the field an amount $alpha(r),text dr$. It makes sense that we just need to add up (integrate) all of these values (right integral) to determine the total field (left integral).






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
      $endgroup$
      – user109923
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
      $endgroup$
      – R.W. Bird
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      4 hours ago















    3













    $begingroup$

    The left hand integral limits should be with respect to the field you get as you add up the contributions to the field due to each charged ring. Therefore, it should start at $0$ and end with the final field. i.e.
    $$int_0^E_xtext dE_x' = int_0^R1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$



    Trivially, the integral on the left side is just the total field $E_x$.




    Seeing some of your comments, you seemed to be confused as to what $r$ and $R$ actually represent. It looks like $x$ is the constant distance between the center of the disk and the point at which you are calculating the field at. $r$ is the radius of one of the rings of thickness $text dr$, and $R$ is the radius of the entire disk. Note that you are not determining the field at $r$, since $r$ is not a position in this case.



    Your differential relation
    $$text dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2=alpha(r),text dr$$
    is essentially telling you each ring of radius $r$ and thickness $text dr$ contributes to the field an amount $alpha(r),text dr$. It makes sense that we just need to add up (integrate) all of these values (right integral) to determine the total field (left integral).






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
      $endgroup$
      – user109923
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
      $endgroup$
      – R.W. Bird
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      4 hours ago













    3














    3










    3







    $begingroup$

    The left hand integral limits should be with respect to the field you get as you add up the contributions to the field due to each charged ring. Therefore, it should start at $0$ and end with the final field. i.e.
    $$int_0^E_xtext dE_x' = int_0^R1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$



    Trivially, the integral on the left side is just the total field $E_x$.




    Seeing some of your comments, you seemed to be confused as to what $r$ and $R$ actually represent. It looks like $x$ is the constant distance between the center of the disk and the point at which you are calculating the field at. $r$ is the radius of one of the rings of thickness $text dr$, and $R$ is the radius of the entire disk. Note that you are not determining the field at $r$, since $r$ is not a position in this case.



    Your differential relation
    $$text dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2=alpha(r),text dr$$
    is essentially telling you each ring of radius $r$ and thickness $text dr$ contributes to the field an amount $alpha(r),text dr$. It makes sense that we just need to add up (integrate) all of these values (right integral) to determine the total field (left integral).






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    The left hand integral limits should be with respect to the field you get as you add up the contributions to the field due to each charged ring. Therefore, it should start at $0$ and end with the final field. i.e.
    $$int_0^E_xtext dE_x' = int_0^R1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2$$



    Trivially, the integral on the left side is just the total field $E_x$.




    Seeing some of your comments, you seemed to be confused as to what $r$ and $R$ actually represent. It looks like $x$ is the constant distance between the center of the disk and the point at which you are calculating the field at. $r$ is the radius of one of the rings of thickness $text dr$, and $R$ is the radius of the entire disk. Note that you are not determining the field at $r$, since $r$ is not a position in this case.



    Your differential relation
    $$text dE_x = 1 over 4piepsilon_02pisigma rx,text dr over (x^2+r^2)^3/2=alpha(r),text dr$$
    is essentially telling you each ring of radius $r$ and thickness $text dr$ contributes to the field an amount $alpha(r),text dr$. It makes sense that we just need to add up (integrate) all of these values (right integral) to determine the total field (left integral).







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited 4 hours ago

























    answered 8 hours ago









    Aaron StevensAaron Stevens

    22.2k4 gold badges41 silver badges78 bronze badges




    22.2k4 gold badges41 silver badges78 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
      $endgroup$
      – user109923
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
      $endgroup$
      – R.W. Bird
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      4 hours ago
















    • $begingroup$
      Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
      $endgroup$
      – user109923
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
      $endgroup$
      – R.W. Bird
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
      $endgroup$
      – Aaron Stevens
      4 hours ago















    $begingroup$
    Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Isn't that a bit like assuming you already know how the answer is going to turn out?
    $endgroup$
    – user109923
    7 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
    $endgroup$
    – R.W. Bird
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    As Aaron points out, they are adding contributions to the field from thin rings of charge located in the disk, each of radius r and thickness dr. Each little segment of a ring contributes at an angle from the x axis. For the x component you multiply by x/(x^2 + r^2)^(1/2). The charge in each ring depends on the charge density and area: σ(2 π r dr). The field drops off with the distance squared: (x^2 + r^2). The limits reflect the distribution of charged rings.
    $endgroup$
    – R.W. Bird
    7 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @user109923 not at all. Just because I know that adding up all of the field contributions gives me the total field it doesn't mean I know what that field is. That is what the right side integral is for.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    7 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    4 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @user109923 Is there anything that is unclear to you?
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    4 hours ago













    0













    $begingroup$


    But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$
    represents the field component at the point due to a ring




    $E_x(r)$ is a poor notation here since it certainly looks like the $x$ component of the electric field as a function of the radial coordinate $r$. Further, it is clear from the integral that $E_x = E_x(x)$.



    Here, $dE_x$ or $dE_x|_r$ is the contribution to the total electric field (at coordinate $x$ on the $x$-axis) due an infinitesimal ring of charge between $r$ and $r + dr$.



    If it helps, consider the approximation by finite rings of charge located between $r$ and $r + Delta r$. Let there be $N$ such rings such that



    $$Delta r = fracRN$$



    and



    $$r_n = (n-1)Delta r$$



    To find the total electric field due to the contributions $E_x,n$ from the $N$ rings making up the disk, we simply sum the contributions (linearity of electric field).



    $$E_x = sum_n=1^NE_x,n$$



    In the limit $Nrightarrowinfty$, the contributions become infinitesimal $E_x,nrightarrow dE_x|_r$, and the sum becomes an integral.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



















      0













      $begingroup$


      But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$
      represents the field component at the point due to a ring




      $E_x(r)$ is a poor notation here since it certainly looks like the $x$ component of the electric field as a function of the radial coordinate $r$. Further, it is clear from the integral that $E_x = E_x(x)$.



      Here, $dE_x$ or $dE_x|_r$ is the contribution to the total electric field (at coordinate $x$ on the $x$-axis) due an infinitesimal ring of charge between $r$ and $r + dr$.



      If it helps, consider the approximation by finite rings of charge located between $r$ and $r + Delta r$. Let there be $N$ such rings such that



      $$Delta r = fracRN$$



      and



      $$r_n = (n-1)Delta r$$



      To find the total electric field due to the contributions $E_x,n$ from the $N$ rings making up the disk, we simply sum the contributions (linearity of electric field).



      $$E_x = sum_n=1^NE_x,n$$



      In the limit $Nrightarrowinfty$, the contributions become infinitesimal $E_x,nrightarrow dE_x|_r$, and the sum becomes an integral.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        0














        0










        0







        $begingroup$


        But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$
        represents the field component at the point due to a ring




        $E_x(r)$ is a poor notation here since it certainly looks like the $x$ component of the electric field as a function of the radial coordinate $r$. Further, it is clear from the integral that $E_x = E_x(x)$.



        Here, $dE_x$ or $dE_x|_r$ is the contribution to the total electric field (at coordinate $x$ on the $x$-axis) due an infinitesimal ring of charge between $r$ and $r + dr$.



        If it helps, consider the approximation by finite rings of charge located between $r$ and $r + Delta r$. Let there be $N$ such rings such that



        $$Delta r = fracRN$$



        and



        $$r_n = (n-1)Delta r$$



        To find the total electric field due to the contributions $E_x,n$ from the $N$ rings making up the disk, we simply sum the contributions (linearity of electric field).



        $$E_x = sum_n=1^NE_x,n$$



        In the limit $Nrightarrowinfty$, the contributions become infinitesimal $E_x,nrightarrow dE_x|_r$, and the sum becomes an integral.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$




        But then what does $E_x(r)$ represent? The problem only said that $dE_x$
        represents the field component at the point due to a ring




        $E_x(r)$ is a poor notation here since it certainly looks like the $x$ component of the electric field as a function of the radial coordinate $r$. Further, it is clear from the integral that $E_x = E_x(x)$.



        Here, $dE_x$ or $dE_x|_r$ is the contribution to the total electric field (at coordinate $x$ on the $x$-axis) due an infinitesimal ring of charge between $r$ and $r + dr$.



        If it helps, consider the approximation by finite rings of charge located between $r$ and $r + Delta r$. Let there be $N$ such rings such that



        $$Delta r = fracRN$$



        and



        $$r_n = (n-1)Delta r$$



        To find the total electric field due to the contributions $E_x,n$ from the $N$ rings making up the disk, we simply sum the contributions (linearity of electric field).



        $$E_x = sum_n=1^NE_x,n$$



        In the limit $Nrightarrowinfty$, the contributions become infinitesimal $E_x,nrightarrow dE_x|_r$, and the sum becomes an integral.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 4 hours ago

























        answered 4 hours ago









        Alfred CentauriAlfred Centauri

        51.1k3 gold badges54 silver badges166 bronze badges




        51.1k3 gold badges54 silver badges166 bronze badges






























            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%2f499914%2ffield-of-a-uniformly-charged-disk-integration-question%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

            19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

            Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

            Кастелфранко ди Сопра Становништво Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију43°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.5588543°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.558853179688„The GeoNames geographical database”„Istituto Nazionale di Statistica”проширитиууWorldCat156923403n850174324558639-1cb14643287r(подаци)