Gauss Law Lab Example
Gauss Law Lab Example
Phys 8B Spring
Due: 2/23/2023
1 Introduction
In this experiment, we study the relationship between the intensity distribution and the
geometrical configuration of a corresponding source. In particular, the intensity of light is
studied in the cases when the source exhibits spherical, cylindrical and plane symmetry.
2. Instead of a line of charge, we will be working with a long fluorescent lightbulb, about
2 m long and a few centimeters in diameter. If you put the light meter right against
the bulb, does it look like a line of charge? What limits should you have on your
measurement to ensure that it is effectively infinite?
3. You’ve taken data of the light intensity coming from a computer screen taken to be
an infinite planar source. However, the results of fitting your data indicate that for
rn , n = 0.83. What kind of source geometry did you actually measure the computer
screen to be, and how can you correct this.
4. What are the target variables to determine from your measurements, and the ex-
pected values they should have?
2 Theory
⃗ such as electric field, gravitational
Consider a source of a certain vector physical quantity E,
field, etc. Imagine the field lines emerging from the source (or disappearing into the “sink”).
If one uses a “net” to fully enclose the source (or sink), then the number of field lines
captured by the net is the same, regardless of its shape and size. This is true as long as
1
Figure 1: Diagram of a spherical Gaussian surface enclosing a point charge. One ray of
the radially outward electric field is drawn, puncturing the Gaussian surface.
the field lines always emerge from a source and terminate at a sink. Therefore, the flux of
the field lines passing through the net, which is known as a Gaussian surface, S defined as
I
ΦE = ⃗ ·A
E ⃗ (1)
S
is independent of the shape and size of the Gaussian surface. Here the integral is over the
entire closed surface. This observation is particularly valuable if the geometry of the source
(or sink) has a useful symmetry. For example, if the source is a point then its E-field is
spherically symmetric about the source itself, in which case we may specifically choose a
particular Gaussian surface to take full advantage of the symmetry – namely a spherical
shell of radius r centered at the source. For example, see the diagram in Figure 1.
Since the E-field is uniform in magnitude and radial in direction everywhere on the
Gaussian surface, we find
I
ΦE = E⃗ ·A
⃗ (2)
I S
= EdA (3)
SI
=E dA (4)
S
= EA, (5)
2
Figure 2: Diagram of a cylindrical Gaussian surface enclosing a line charge. One vector
of the radially outward electric field is drawn, with tail of the vector at the radius of the
Gaussian surface.
which gives
ΦE
E= (6)
A
ΦE
= (7)
4πr2
⇒ E ∝ r−2 . (8)
Thus we have found the dependence of E on r, the distance to the source.
For a source of cylindrical symmetry, such as a very long, uniform, straight-line source,
the Gaussian surface which matches this symmetry would be a cylinder of radius r, coaxial
with the line. For example, see the digram in Figure 2. The side area of a cylinder of
length ℓ is 2πrℓ, whereas the top and bottom of the cylinder do not contribute to Φ since
E⃗ and dA⃗ are perpendicular to each other in these regions. Thus, for such a line source,
ΦE
E= (9)
A
ΦE
= (10)
2πrℓ
⇒ E ∝ r−1 . (11)
Finally, for a plane source, we choose a Gaussian surface shaped as a box, bisected by
the plane source itself. No contribution to Φ occurs at the four sides of the box, so if the
total area of the top and bottom is A, we simply find
ΦE
E= (12)
A
⇒ E ∝ r0 , (13)
3
which is independent of r!
In our experiment, the particular physical quantity we measure is I, the intensity of
light, defined as power intercepted per unit area. That is, energy per area per time. The
flux Φ then corresponds to P , the total power intercepted by the Gaussian surface, which
is just the total power emitted by the source enclosed by the Gaussian surface, and is
independent of the shape and size of the surface. So we expect
where n = −2 for a point light source, n = −1 for a long line light source, and n = 0 for
a large, uniformly illuminated panel of light. C is simply a constant, in which we are not
interested. In this experiment, we wish to determine and verify the value of n for each of
the three symmetries.
3 Experiment
3.1 Equipment
• point source: a small light bulb
• ruler
3.2 Procedure
Position the fiber optical probe of the photometer (which measures the relative intensity
of light) and the ruler so that you can measure the value of r, the distance from the source
to the tip of the probe. Note that r does not start from the surface of the source! Rather,
it starts from the center of symmetry of the source, such as the center of the filament of
the bulb and the axis of the fluorescent tube. Shield your setup from the surroundings with
black panels to reduce exposure to ambient light.
For each of the three sources, take at least 10 readings of the relative intensity I as
you vary r. Be sure to point the tip of the fiber optical probe directly toward the source
to maximize the measured light flux. You can record these measurements in separate data
tables as you will have different distance measurements for each, such as the one in Table 1.
4
r [cm] I [W/m2 ] ln(r) [ln(m)] ln(I) [ln(W/m2 )]
3.2.4 Analysis
We want to fit the I vs. r data from each experiment into a power function I = Crn , and
find the experimental value of n which best fits the data. This is easiest for the plane source
where we expect I(r) ∝ r0 ; i.e. a flat line of constant I. For the other cases, I(r) ∝ 1/r|n| ,
which is not easy to fit on its own. However, we can convert these into a linear function.
The most effective way to do so by taking the logarithm of I(r) in Equation 14, which
5
yields that
which is linear in ln(r). Therefore, if we plot ln(I) vs. ln(r), we should be able to fit the
data to a line and extract a fit parameter n̂ for our experimentally determined value of n.
This we can compare to the theoretically expected value as indicated by Equations 8, 11,
& 13 (n ∈ {−2, −1, 0}). To do the comparison you can use a percent difference, though
this wont work for the Plane Source, where we expect n = 0 (which would require division
by zero). For the Plane Source, we can instead simply use the difference between the
theoretical and experimental, but you will also need to provide reasoning and argue why
the value you get is accurate in order to conclude the relation holds.
You may use Google Sheets or Excel to do your fit (or any other fitting routines or
software of your choosing). In addition to your data table, sketch a plot of your data and
fit lines. This can be done all on one plot, but you will need to use different styles of point
markers for your different data (e.g. dots, stars, triangles, etc.), color coded with the fit
lines, and provide a legend to label them (Point Source, Line Source, Plane Source). Your
plot does not need to have the equations of the fit provided on the plot itself, but they
should be included in your report. Your plot should be included with a caption that gives
the n values for the different source configurations and described what the plot is showing.