Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Hi Brian,
I apologize - my statement was hurried and vague - but of serious import.
I was referring to a line of reasoning which I earlier outlined: the
standard classical line of reasoning (hinging largely on Gauss' law) says
that a conductor (charged or neutral - in an external field or not) is
under a force of tension wherever there is a surface charge. The net
electrostatic force per unit area (DUE TO THE REST OF THE CONDUCTOR AND
THE REST OF THE UNIVERSE) = (1/2) sigma^2 /epsilon - always an outward
force. This (says the classical model) is the net electrostatic force
due to the universe, per unit area of charged conductor surface. IE; the
NET ELECTROSTATIC FORCE is not zero - it is outward. If our scheme says
the conducting surface is in equilibrium under only electrostatic forces,
this (largely Gauss based conclusion) is in question. I really hope
something is wrong with my reasoning here, because it looks to me like
any classical model has to include some non-electrostatic force to
achieve equilibrium here (as we feel forced to do within the nucleus).
Please straighten me out!
Bob Sciamanda
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (ret)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor