So, intuitively speaking, why does the field decreases with increasing wire radius?
I also don't understand the factor epsilon*log(r). Doesn't that contradict the above statement? (smaller radius should lead to a larger field, not smaller)
back
2 comments
epsilon log(r) is the "shielding". I suspect that the field inside will be attenuated by a factor of 1/(epsilon log(r)).
epsilon is the gap, so either way it should be on opposite side of the log(r). Smaller gap, stronger shielding but smaller radius weaker shielding. Am I going nuts?
Hm I guess you're right. I don't know what to tell you. I guess we'd have to have a look at the exact definitions they use in the paper :-)
I've always thought of it like this (could be wrong):
An electric field moves charge. Charge has mass, so it takes work to change it's momentum. When the electric field wave enters the metal, the charge is moved around by the field. So a lot of the energy in the wave is turned into motion. If the wires were thicker, there would be more charge and mass to move around, so more of the energy of the wave is lost moving the charge around by the time it exits the metal.