[2014-10-15 00:09:08 UTC] So if E always points in the same direction as dA (or if the angle is just constant?) then we can just integrate dA to A withouth having to do anything, right? if it was not then we wouldnt be able to simply make dA into A right? [2014-10-15 01:45:58 UTC] HIE :P [2014-10-15 04:05:33 UTC] Sorry I'm worse at physics than is even physically possible. [2014-10-15 04:34:16 UTC] unfortunately im learning guass law now, and uh... it's very confusing, which i dont like, cause I prefer to understand what's going on in class [2014-10-15 04:34:28 UTC] thankfully my teacher is from IRAN so i know that the exams won't be very difficult (hopefully) [2014-10-15 04:36:21 UTC] OK dr, very easy question for you [2014-10-15 04:37:47 UTC] so if you have a bunch of concentric conducting shells, and you want to find the field for a point inbetween them, do you just use guass's law and use q enclosed to be the sum of charges in our surface, or must you first redistribute all the charges because they are conductors and then use guass's law? or will this even matter? [2014-10-15 04:38:35 UTC] im referring to when you have for example a +q shell inside a +3q shell, then the inner surface of the +3q would become -q, but now on closer inspection, it seems like it would not matter in anycase, right?? [2014-10-15 11:58:03 UTC] Trying to get a title but i swear superjer is intent with screwing with my head first [2014-10-15 11:58:33 UTC] fucking litteral logic [2014-10-15 19:36:48 UTC] uh.. he did give you a title?