What Is the Electric Field at the Surface of a Nucleus with 89 Protons?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric field at the surface of a nucleus with 89 protons, modeled as a uniformly charged sphere with a radius of 7.11e-15 m. An initial attempt using the formula E=F/q led to a calculated electric field of 2.53e21 N/C, which was deemed incorrect. Participants suggest that applying Gauss's law might provide a simpler and more accurate solution, although there is uncertainty about whether this method has been covered in their coursework. Despite using Gauss's law, one participant received the same answer as the initial calculation, raising questions about the accuracy of both methods. The discussion highlights the complexities of calculating electric fields in nuclear physics.
kyin01
Messages
47
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A certain atom of has 89 protons. Assume that the nucleus is a sphere with radius 7.11e-15 m and with the charge of the protons uniformly spread through the sphere. At the nucleus surface what is the magnitude of the electric field produced by the protons?

Homework Equations


E=F/q

F=(q1q2 * 8.99e9)/ d2

a single proton has a charge of 1.6e-19 C

3. The Attempt at a Solution [/b]
So my understanding of the problem is they want me to calculate the electric field at the edge of the nucleus.
so I started my assuming the electric field being at the center of the nucleus with my test charge at the edge of the nucleus. So I did 89 times the charge of a single proton times the constant all divided by the radius squared and I get a number of
2.53e21 N/C

which I am told is wrong, what did I do wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think this would do better in Physics homework.
 
I believe that's the hard way to do that. You don't really know the force of all the protons. An easier way to do the problem would be to use Gauss's law.
 
Ithryndil said:
I believe that's the hard way to do that. You don't really know the force of all the protons. An easier way to do the problem would be to use Gauss's law.

I don't think he introduced us that law yet, am i doing it right in the hard way method?
 
kyin01 said:
I don't think he introduced us that law yet, am i doing it right in the hard way method?

Interesting. When I did it with Gauss's law the answer I got is the same as the answer you got...so why it says it's wrong is beyond me. Perhaps we are both missing something.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top