Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

which in a second generates in a gramme of matter a ve- | proof-plane (or to its square, if the second of the above locity of a centimetre per second.

The law of electric force between two quantities q and q' now becomes

Force-27.

The unit of quantity which we have just defined is called the electro-static unit, in contradistinction to the electromagnetic unit, which we shall define hereafter. Since the dimension of unit of force is [LMT-"], where L,M,T symbolize units of length, mass, and time, we have for the dimension of unit of electrical quantity [Q]

[Q]-[LF]-[L*M*T'].

Quantitative Results concerning Distribution.

It has already been indicated that electricity in equilibrium resides on the surface of conducting bodies. We must now review shortly the experimental method by which this surface distribution has been more closely investigated. We shall state here some of the general principles arrived at, and one or two of the results, reserving others for quotation when we come to the mathematical theory of electrical distribution.

The most important experiments are due to Coulomb. He used the proof-plane and the torsion balance. Riess, who afterwards made similar experiments, used methods similar to those of Coulomb.

modes of operation be adopted), or we may simply observe the angle of equilibrium and calculate the quantity from that. It is supposed, for simplicity of explanation in all that follows, that the former of the two alternatives is adopted, and that the movable ball is always independently charged.

by every insulated conductor has already been alluded to. The gradual loss of electricity experienced more or less This loss forms one of the greatest difficulties to be encountered in such experiments as we are now describing. If we apply the proof-plane to a part of a conductor and take the balance reading, giving a torsion 7, say, and repeat the observation, after time t, we shall get a different torsion owing to the loss of electricity in the interval. This loss, partly if not mainly due to the insulating supports, depends on a great many circumstances, some of which are entirely beyond even the observation of the experimenter. We may admit, however, what experiment confirms within certain small limits, that the rate of loss of electricity is proportional to the charge, and we shall call (the loss per unit of time on hypothesis of uniformity) the coefficient of dissipation (d). This coefficient, although, as we have implied, tolerably constant for one experiment, will vary very much from experiment to experiment, and from day to day; it depends above all on the weather.

Supposing we have determined this coefficient by such an observation as the above, then we can calculate the torsion r', which we should have observed had we touched the body at any interval t' after the first experiment; for we have, provided ť be small,

T-T1-8t=T2+d(t−t').

if t't, we have

T/= (T2+T2).

densities at two points A and A' of the same conductor. Coulomb used this principle in comparing the electric He touched the two points a number of times in succession, first A, then A', then A again, and so on, observing the corresponding torsions 71, 71, 7, etc., the intervals between the operations being very nearly equal. He thus got for the ratio of the densities at A and A' the values +

Allusion has already been made to the use of the proofplane, and it has been stated that when applied to any part of the surface of an electrified body, it brings away just as much electricity as originally occupied the part of the surface which it covers. If, therefore, we electrify the movable ball of the torsion balance in the same sense as the body we are to examine, and note the repulsion caused by In particular, the proof-plane when introduced in place of the fixed ball after having touched in succession two parts of the surface of the body, we can, from the indications of the balance, calculate the ratio of the quantities of electricity on the plane in the two cases, and hence the ratio of the electrical densities at the two points of the surface. We suppose, of course, that the proof-plane is small enough to allow us to assume that the electrical density is sensibly uniform over the small area covered by it. In some of his experiments Riess used a small sphere (about two lines in diameter) instead of the small disc of the proof-plane as Coulomb used it. The sphere in such cases ought to be very small, and even then, except in the case of plane surfaces, its use is objectionable, unless the object be merely to determine, by twice touching the same point of the same conductor, the ratio of the whole charges on the conductor at two different times. The fundamental requisite is that the testing body shall, when applied, alter the form of the testing body as little as possible, and this requisite is best satisfied by a small disc, and the better the smaller the disc is. The theoretically correct procedure would be to have a small portion of the actual surface of the body movable. If we could remove such a piece so as to break contact with all neighboring portions simultaneously, then we should, by testing the electrification of this in the balance, get a perfect measure of the mean electric surface density on the removed portion. We shall see that Coulomb did employ a method

like this.

There are various ways of using the torsion balance in researches on distribution. We may either electrify the movable ball independently (as above described), or we may electrify it each time by contact with the proof-plane when it is inserted into the balance. It must be noticed that the repulsion of the movable ball is in the first case proportional to the charge on the proof-plane, but in the second to the square of the charge, so that the indications must be reduced differently.

In measuring we may either bring the movable ball to a fixed position, in which case the whole torsion required to keep it in this position is proportional to the charge on the 1 It is evident from what we have advanced here that the use of the proof-plane to determine the electric density at points of a surface where the curvature is very great, e. g., at edges or conical points, is Inadmissible. If we attempt to determine the electrical density at the vertex of a cone by applying a proof-sphere there, as Riess did, we shall very evidently get a result much under the mark, owing to the blunting of the point when the sphere is in situ. We should, on the other hand, for an opposite reason, get too large a result by apply

ing a proof-plane edgewise to a point of a surface where the curvature

is continuous.

27.

2T1

2T, +, etc. These values ought to be all equal "+" the mean of them was taken as the best result.

In certain cases, where the rapidity of the electric dissipation was too great to allow the above method to be applied, Riess used the method of paired proof-planes. For a description of this, and for some elaborate calculations on the subject of electrical dissipation, the reader is referred to Riess's work.

The cage method is well adapted for experiments on distribution. The proof-plane, proof-sphere, or paired proof-planes may all be used in conjunction with it. If the cage be fairly well insulated, and a tolerably delicate Thomson's electrometer be used, so that the cage may be made large, and the surface density on its outside therefore small, there will be little loss of the external charge; and the method has this advantage, that dissipation from the proof-plane inside the cage does not affect the result of the measurement in hand, it being indifferent, qua effect on the electrometer, whether the electricity inside the cage be on the proof-plane, in the air, or elsewhere, provided merely it be inside. The state of the cage as to electrified air, etc., is easily tested by the electrometer at any time.

Coulomb's Results.-If we electrify a sphere, and test the electrical density at two points of its surface, experiment will show, as would be expected from the symmetry of the body, that the density at the two points is the same. If we test the electric density at any point of a sphere, and then halve its charge by division with an equal neutral sphere, and test the electric density again, we shall find it half what it was before. The electric density at any point is therefore proportional to the whole charge on the sphere, or to the mean density, meaning by that the whole charge divided by the whole surface of the sphere.

If, instead of a sphere, we operate with an ellipsoid generated by the revolution of an ellipse about its major axis, we shall find that the electric density is not uniform

as in the case of the sphere, but greater at the sharp ends of the major axis than at the equator, and the ratio of the densities increases indefinitely as we make the ellipsoid sharper and sharper. This leads us to state a principle of great importance in the theory of electrical distribution, viz., that the electrical density is very great at any pointed part of a conductor.

If we determine the ratio of the densities at two points of an ellipsoid1, diminish the charge, and redetermine the same ratio, we shall find that, although the actual densities are diminished, the ratio remains the same; and if we determine the density at any point of the ellipsoid, and then halve its charge by touching it with an equal and similar ellipsoid (they must be placed with their axes in the same straight line, and made to touch at the poles), and redetermine the density at the same point as before, we shall find that the density in the second case is half that in the first. We have in fact, in general, the important proposition that—

The density at any point of a conductor is proportional to the whole charge on the conductor, or, what is the same, to the mean density.

The following case given by Coulomb is interesting; it shows the tendency of electricity towards the projecting parts, ends, or points of bodies. The conductor was a cylinder with hemispherical ends,-the length of the cylinder being 30 inches, its diameter 2 inches. Coulomb gives the following results:

1 38-6

greater than for the larger. The above result also affords an experimental illustration of the action of the earth in discharging a conductor connected with it. Comparing the conductor to the small sphere and the earth to the large sphere of 62 times the superficial area of the small one, if we start with charge Q on small sphere, and then put the two in contact, the charge on the small sphere will be reduced to- Q, so that the mean density is diminished in the ratio 1 : 386. This ratio increases indefinitely as the ratio increases. These results are in satisfactory agreement with Poisson's calculations. Coulomb was led by his observations to assign 2 as the limit of the ratio of the mean densities when the ratio of the diameters of the spheres is infinitely great; the mathematical theory gives

[blocks in formation]

S'

S

Coulomb also determined the density at the apex or smaller end of the body formed by two unequal spheres in contact. The following are his results, the mean density of the larger sphere being unity :

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

the middle.

Other results, taken from Coulomb's unpublished papers, may be found in Biot, Mascart, or Riess. His results for a circular disc we shall quote further on.

Riess made a series of experiments on cubes, cones, etc.; but as these are not of theoretical interest, the calculation in such cases being beyond the powers of analysis at present, and as the use of the proof-plane or sphere with bodies where edges and points occur is not free from objection, we content ourselves with referring to Riess's

work for an account of the results.

tors.

Coulomb made a series of experiments on Coulomb's researches bodies of different forms, which he built up out on compo- of spheres of different sizes, or out of spheres site conduc- and cylinders. These are of very great interest, partly on account of the close agreement of some of the results with the deductions subsequently made by Poisson from the mathematical theory, and partly on account of the clearness with which they convey to the mind the general principles of electric distribution. His method in most cases was to build up the conductor and electrify it with all the different parts in contact, and then, after separating the parts widely, to determine the mean density or the whole amount of electricity on each part by the proof-plane or otherwise.

When two equal spheres are placed in contact the distribution will of course be the same in each; Coulomb found that, from the point of contact up to a point on the surface of either sphere distant from it by about 20°, no trace of electricity could be observed; at 30°, 60°, 90°, values 20, 77, 96, 1.00. When the spheres are unequal, 180° respectively, the electric density had the relative the distribution is no longer alike on each. On the small sphere it is less uniform, and the density at the point of the small sphere diametrically opposite the point of contact is greater than anywhere else on the body. The distribution on the larger sphere is more uniform than on the smaller, and the more unequal the spheres are the more uniform is the distribution on the larger, and the smaller the unelectrified part in the neighborhood of the point of contact. The following results of Coulomb are useful illustrations of distribution on elongated and pointed bodies:

Three equal spheres (2 in. diameter) in contact, with their centres in the same straight line: the mean densities were 1.34, 1.00, 1.34 on the spheres 1, 2, and 3 respectively. 1-56, 105, 1.00. Six equal spheres as before: mean densities on 1, 2, and 3

Twelve equal spheres: mean densities on 1, 2, and 6 — 1.70, 1.14, 1.00.

Twenty-four equal spheres: mean densities on 1, 2, and 12 — 1.75, 1.07, 1:00.

Large (8 in. diameter) sphere with four small (2 in.) spheres applied to it, all the centres in line: the mean density on large sphere being 1, that on the small one next it was 60, that on

the extreme small one 2:08.

For spheres in contact he found the following results,8,2,; S', Q', o' denoting the surface, quantity of elec- densities on 1, 2, 13, 24, 251.00, 60, 1-28, 1-46, 2-17. tricity, and mean surface density for the two spheres respectively.

Large sphere 1, and twenty-four (2 to 25) small ones: mean

[ocr errors][subsumed][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

From this it appears that although the whole amount of electricity on the large sphere is greater than that on the small, yet the mean density for the smaller sphere is

1 We suppose in all these experiments that we are dealing with a single body, sufficiently distant not only from all electrified bodies but from all neutral conductors to be undisturbed by them. This condition is essential.

It would not do to make the pole of one touch the equator of the other, or to place them otherwise unsymmetrically. 2 Traité de Physique.

MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF ELECTRICAL

EQUILIBRIUM.

We take as the basis of our theory the assumptions already laid down under the head Provisional Theory, and in addition the precise elementary law of electrical action established by Coulomb. We shall also suppose that we have only perfect conductors and perfect non-conductors to deal with, the medium being in all cases the same, viz., air. When we have to deal with electrified non-conductors we shall suppose the electrification to be rigid, i. e., incapable of disturbance by any electric force we have to consider.

In our mathematical outline we have in view the requirements of the physical more than the mathematical student, and shall pass over many points of great interest and importance to the latter, for full treatment of which we must refer him to original sources, such as the classical papers of Green, the papers of Sir William Thomson, and the works of Gauss. Of

peculiar interest mathematically is the elegant and powerful memoir of the last-Allgemeine Lehrsätze in Beziehung auf die im verkehrten Verhältnisse des Quadrats der Entfernung wirkenden Anziehungs- und Abstossungskräfte, in which will be found detailed discussions of the continuity of the integrals used in the potential theory, etc. The works of Green and Thomson are too well known in this country to require farther

remark.

Definitions,

When, in what follows, we speak of the electric field, we mean simply a portion of space which we are considering with reference to its electrical properties; it will be found conducive to clearness to regard that space as bounded. In general the natural boundary would be the walls of the experimenting room; but, for mathematical purposes, we shall, unless the contrary is stated, suppose our field to be bounded by a sphere of radius so great that the action at a point on its circumference due to an electrified body in the field is infinitely

small.

The resultant force at a point in the electric field is the force which would be exerted on a unit of electricity placed there without disturbing the electrical distribution elsewhere. It is plain that the resultant force has a definite magnitude and direction at every point in the field, and consequently is in modern mathematical language a vector. A curve drawn in the field such that its tangent at every point is in the direction of the resultant force at that point is called a line of force. We can draw such a line through every point of space, and if we suspend at any point a small conducting needle, it is obvious, from what we have already laid down about induction, that it will take up a position very nearly parallel to the line of force; so that if we start from any point and carry the centre of the needle always in the direction in which the needle points, we should trace out a line of force.

The potential at any point is the work done by a unit of electricity in passing from that point to the infinitely distant boundary of the electric field, the electric distribution being supposed undisturbed. It is usual to call the infinitely distant boundary a place of zero potential. Zero is to be understood in the sense of "point or position from which we reckon." 1

Force in

Consider two points P, Q, infinitely near each terms of v. other in the field, and draw a curve from P passing through Q to co. Then, if F be the component parallel to PQ of the resultant force at P, we have by our definition

[blocks in formation]

dv dx

[ocr errors]

dV dz

(3)

dv dy We may remark that, in all cases which we shall consider at present, the work done in passing from any point to any other point is the same whatever the intermediate path of our exploring unit. Hence V as above defined is a single valued function, and the formula (3) gives the components of resultant force when V is known.

The work done by a unit of + electricity in passing by any path from P to Q is called the electro-motive force from P to Q; it is obviously equal to the difference of the potentials at the two points. Thus

Vp_\

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small]

where D denotes +(-)2 + (n − y)3 + (5 − x)2, and the integral is to be extended over every part of the field where there field, on the understanding that p= 0 where there is no charge. is any charge,-or, which is the same thing, over the whole

If, as will generally be the case, the electricity is distributed on a surface in such a way that on an element dS of surface there is a quantity odS of electricity, where a is a finite surface density, then

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

where D has the same meaning as before, and the integral is extended all over the electrified surface or surfaces.

We may make here the important remark that, Continuity and (8) are finite and continuous. This depends so long as p or σ is not infinite, the integrals in (7) of V. on the fact, which we cannot stop to prove, that the part of the potential at P, contributed by an infinitely small portion of electricity surrounding P, is infinitely small.

occur in nature.

In practice, therefore, the electric potential is always continuous; for although we may in theory speak of discrete points and electrified lines where finite electrification is condensed into infinitely small space, yet no such cases ever It may also be shown for any electrical system of finite extent, that, as the distance of P from O, any fixed point at a finite distance from the system is increased indefinitely, the potential at P approaches more and M more nearly the value where M is the algebraical sum of all the electricity in the system, and D the distance of P from O. Hence at any point infinitely distant from O, V = 0.

D'

Surface in

tegral of electric in

duction.

We next proceed to prove the following proposition, which will form the basis of the subsequent theory :The surface integral of electric induction taken all over the surface inclosing any space is equal to 4 times the algebraical sum of all the electricity in that space. By the electric induction across any element of the surface (taken so small that the resultant force at every point of it may be regarded as uniform) is meant the product of the area of the element into the component of the resultant force in the direction of the normal to the element which is drawn outwards with respect to the inclosed space. Thus dS being an element of surface, e the angle between the positive direction of the resultant force R and the outward normal, and E the sum of all the electricity in the inclosed space, the proposition in symbols is

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

We shall prove it in the manner most naturally suggested by the theory of electrical elements acting at a distance, by first showing that it is true for a single element e either outside or inside the surface. Let us suppose e to be at a point P, fig. 11, within S, which for greater generality we may suppose to be a re-entrant surface. Draw a small cone of vertical solid angle do at P, and let it cut the surface in the elements QR, Q'R', Q"R"; let the outward normals to these be QM, Q'M', Q"M". The elements of the surface integral contributed by QR, Q'R', QRe cose

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Combining these results, we see that the proposition is true for ■ single element. Hence, by summation for all the elements, we can at once extend it to any electrical system; for all the elements external to S give zero, and all the internal elements give 4x20- 4 E. Let us apply the above proposition to the space Equation enclosed by the infinitely small parallelepiped of Laplace whose centre is at xyz, and the co-ordinates of and Poisson. whose angles are xdx, y±jdy, z±jdz. The contributions to the surface integral from the two dv dx day faces perpendicular to the x-axis are — + dydz dx 2 dx2 (dv dx d2V dyda. Adding these and the four parts dx 2 dx2 from the remaining sides, and equating to 4wpdxdydz, which is the 4E in this case, we have

and

ᏯᏙ ᏯᏙ ᏯᏙ

+ + + 4xp=0, dx dy da

or, as it is usually abbreviated,

[ocr errors]

(10) Equation (10), originally found by Laplace for the case p = 0, and extended by Poisson, has been called the characteristic equation of the potential. It may be applied at any point where P is finite and the electric force continuous. It might be shown by examining the integrals representing X, Y, Z, and etc., that the electric force is continuous wherever there is finite volume density. Equation (10) may be looked on either as an equation to determine the potential when p is given, or as an equation to determine when V is given. We shall have

dv

dx

occasion to use it in both ways.

Conditions at an elec

trified surface.

P

The characteristic equation cannot be applied in the form (10) when the resultant force is discontinuous. This will be found to be the case at a surface on which electricity is distributed with finite surface density. Let us consider the values of the resultant force at two points, P and Q, infinitely near each other, but on opposite sides of such a surface. Resolve the resultant force tangentially and normally to the surface. If we consider the part of the force which arises from an infinitely small circular disc, whose radius, though infinitely small, is yet infinitely great compared with the distance between P and Q, we see that infinitely little is contributed to the tangential component at P or Q by this disc, while it can be readily shown that the part of the normal component arising therefrom is 20, directed from the disc in each case, when o is the surface density. Hence, since the part of the resultant force arising from all the rest of the electrified system obviously is not discontinuous between P and Q, the tangential component is continuous when we pass through an electrified surface, but the normal component is suddenly altered by 4ño.

For a thorough investigation of these points the reader is referred to Gauss or Green. We can arrive very readily at the amount of the discontinuity of the normal force by applying (9) to the cylinder formed by carrying an infinitely short generating line round the element dS, so that one end of the cylinder is on one side of dS and the other on the other, the lateral dimensions being infinitely small, but still infinitely greater than the longitudinal. The only part of the integral which is of the order of dS is the part arising from the two ends; hence if N, N' be the value of the normal components on the two sides of S, we clearly get

(N- N') dS= 4nodS, or N-N' — 4′′σ.

If Vi, V, denote the potentials on the two sides of S, and v1, the normals to ds, drawn towards these sides respectively,

then we may obviously write our equation

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

We have seen that we can draw through every Level point of the electric field a line of force. surface, surface constructed so that the potential at every point of it has the same value is called an equipotential or level surface. We can obviously draw such a surface passing through every point of the field. It is clear, too, that the line of force at every point must be perpendicular to the level surface passing through that point. For since no work is done level surface to a neighboring point, there can be no comon a unit of electricity in passing from one point of a ponent of the resultant force tangential to the surface; in other words, the direction of the resultant force is perpendicular to the surface. This is expressed otherwise by saying that the lines of force are orthogonal trajectories to the level

surface.

Tubes of

If we take a small portion of a level surface, and draw through every point of the boundary force. surface which will cut orthogonally every level surface a line of force, we shall thus generate a tubular which it meets. Such a surface is called a tube of force.

Let a tube of force cut two level surfaces in the elements dS and dS'. Apply to the space contained by the part of the tube between the surfaces our fundamental equation (9). We thus get, since there is no normal component perpendicular to the generating lines of the tube,

[blocks in formation]

provided the tube does not cut through electrified matter between the two surfaces. Here R and R' denote the resultant force at dS and d'S, which are supposed so small that the force may be considered uniform all over each of them. It appears then that the product of the resultant force into the area of the normal section of a tube of force is constant for the same tube so long as it does not cut through electrified matter; or, what amounts to the same, the resultant force at any point of a tube of force varies inversely as the normal section of the tube at that point.

Important tubes of property of force RdS -R'dS'.

If we divide up any level surface into a series of small elements, such that the product RdS is constant for each element and equal to unity, and draw tubes of force through each small element, then the electric induction through any finite area of the surface is equal to the number of tubes of force which pass through that area; for if n be that number, we have, summing over the whole of the area— ΣRdS=n,

. . (13) the left-hand side of which is the electric induction through the finite area. It is clear, from the constancy of the product RdS for each tube of force, that if this is true for one level surface it will be true for every other cut by the tubes of force. It is evident that the proposition is true for any surface, whether a level surface or not, as may be seen by projecting the area considered by lines of force on a level surface, and applying to the cylinder thus formed the surface integral of electric induction, it being remarked as obvious that the same number of tubes of force pass through the area as through the projection. This enables us to state the proposition involved in equation (9) in the following manner:

The excess of the number of tubes of forces which Charge leave a closed surface over the number which enter measured is equal to 4 times the algebraical sum of all the by tubes of force. electricity within the surface.

(N.B.-The positive direction of a line of force is that direction in which a unit of electricity would tend to move along it.) This proposition enables us to measure the charge of a body by means of the lines' of force. We have only to draw a surface inclosing the body, and very near to it, and count the lines of force entering and leaving the surface. If the number of the latter, diminished by the

1 Here we drop the distinction between line and tube of force. We shall hereafter suppose the lines of force to be always drawn so as to form unit tubes, and shall speak of these tubes as lines of force, thereby following the usual custom.

number of the former, be divided by 47, the result is the charge on the body.

If we apply (13) to a portion of an equipotential surface so small that R may be considered uniform over the whole of it, we may write

Resultant

ured by

lines of

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

or in words:-The resultant force at any point is force meas equal to the number of lines of force per unit of area of level surface at that point, meaning thereby the number of lines of force which would pass force. through a unit of area of level surface if the force were uniform throughout, and equal to its value at the point considered.

We are now able to express by means of the lines of force the resultant force at any point of the field, and the charge in any element of space. The electrical language thus constructed was invented by Faraday, who continual ly used it in his electrical researches. In the hands of Sir William Thomson, and particularly of Professor Clerk Max well, this language has become capable of representing, not only qualitatively but also quantitatively, with mathematical accuracy, the state of the electric field. It has the additional advantages of being well fitted for the use of the practical electrician, and of lending itself very readily to graphical representation.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

by saying that the charge on any portion of the surface of a We may put this into the language of the lines of force conductor is equal to the number of lines of force issuing from it divided by 4.

Since the surface of a conductor in electric

V con

stant in

tor.

equilibrium is always a level surface, it follows from what we have already proved about a space hollow bounded by a surface of constant potential, that conducinside a hollow conductor the potential is constant, provided there be no electrified bodies within. This is true, bodies there may be outside. Hence, if we inclose any conno matter how we electrify the conductor or what electrified ductor A completely within another B, then electrify B, and put A in metallic communication with it, A will not become charged either + or -; for, A being at the same potential as B, electricity will not tend to flow from the one to the other. This is in reality Biot's' experiment with the hemispheres, to which we have already alluded; only the point of view is slightly changed. The most striking experiment ever made in illustration of the present principle The potential cannot have a maximum or mini-He constructed a hollow cube (12 feet in the edge) of conis that described by Faraday in his Experimental Researches. mum value at a point where there is no electricity. ducting matter, and insulated it in the lecture-room of the For if a maximum value were possible, we could Royal Institution. We quote in his own words the part of tential im- draw round the point a surface at every point of his description which bears on the present question:possible in free space. which the potential was decreasing outwards; consequently at every point of this surface the normal component of the resultant force in the outward direction would be positive, and a positive number of lines of force would leave the surface. But this is impossible, since, by our hypothesis, there is no electricity within. Similarly there could be no minimum value.

It will be convenient, before passing to electrical applications, to state here another general property of the potential which follows from our fundamental proposition.

Maximum

or minimum po

Case of space bounded by level surface.

From this it follows at once that if the potential have the same value at every point of he boundary of a space in which there is no electrified body, then the potential is constant throughout that space, and equal to the value at the boundary. For if the potential at any point within had any value greater or less than the value at the boundary, this would be a case of maximum or minimum potential at a point in free space, which we have seen to be impossible.

In order that there may be electrical equilibrium in a perfect conductor, it is necessary that the resultant electric force should be zero at every point of its substance. For if it were not so at any point the positive electricity there would move in the direction of the resultant force and the negative electricity in the opposite direction, which is inconsistent with our supposition of equilibrium. This condition must be satisfied at any point of the conductor, how ever near the surface. At the surface there must be no tangential component of resultant force, otherwise electricity would move along the surface. In other words, the resultant force at the surface must be normal; its magnitude is not otherwise restricted; for by our hypothesis electricity cannot penetrate into the non-conducting medium.

These conditions are clearly sufficient. We may sum them up in the following single statement:Condition of electri

If the electricity in any conductor is in equilibrium, the potential must have the same value at cal equilib- every point in its substance. rium.

For if the potential be constant, its differential coefficients are zero, so that inside the conductor the resultant force vanishes. Also the surface of the conductor is a level surface, and therefore the resultant force is everywhere normal to it. This constant value of the potential we shall henceforth speak of as the potential of the conductor.

resides on

Since the potential is constant at every point Electricity in the substance of a charged conductor, we have the surface, at every point v2V-0, and hence by the equation of Poisson p=0; that is, there is no electricity in the substance of the conductor. We thus get, as a theoretical conclusion from our hypothesis, the result already

1 Of course in practice there is an upper limit, at which disruptive discharge occurs.

"1172. I put a delicate gold-leaf electrometer within the cube, and then charged the whole by an outside communication, very strongly for some time together; but neither during the charge nor after the discharge did the electrometer or air within show the least sign of electricity. . . . I went into the cube and lived in it, and using all other tests of electrical states, I could not find the least influence upon them, though all the time the outside of the cube was powerfully charged, and large sparks and brushes were darting off from every point of its outer surface."

Indirect evidence

for the law of

inverse square.

The proposition that the potential is constant inside a hollow conductor containing no electrified bodies may be regarded as one of the most firmly established in the whole of experimental science. The experiments on which it rests are of extreme delicacy. It is of the greatest theoretical importance; for we can deduce from it the law of the inverse square. Taking the particular case of a spherical shell, uninfluenced by other bodies, on which of course the electrical distribution must from symmetry be uniform, it can be demonstrated mathematically that, if we assume the action between two elements of electricity to be a function of the distance between them, then that function must be the inverse square, in order that the potential may be constant throughout the interior. A demonstration of this proposition was given by Cavendish, who saw its importance; a more elaborate proof was afterwards given by La place; for a very elegant and simple demonstration we refer the mathematical reader to Clerk Maxwell's Electricity, vol. i. 74. This must be regarded as by far the most satisfactory evidence for the law of the inverse square; for the delicacy of the tests involved infinitely surpasses that of the measurements made with the torsion balance; and now that we have instruments of greatly increased sensitiveness, like Thomson's quadrant electrometer, the experimental evidence might be still further strengthened.

General

distribu

In the problem to determine the distribution of electricity in a given system of conductors, problem the data are in most cases either the charge or of elec the potential for each conductor. If the con- trical ductor is insulated it can neither give nor lose tion. electricity, its charge is therefore given. If, on the other hand, it be connected with some inexhaustible source of electricity at a constant potential, its potential is given. Such a source the earth is assumed to be; and

The experiment was first made by Cavendish. There is an account of it in his hitherto unpublished papers.

Faraday was looking for what he called the absolute charge of matter; incidentally the experiment illustrates the point we are discussing.

« AnteriorContinuar »