A charge +Q is fixed. Another charge +2q and mass M is projected

  • Thread starter Thread starter Asphyx820
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Mass
Asphyx820
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A charge +Q is fixed. Another charge +2q and mass M is projected from a distance R from the fixed charge at and angle 30 with the horizontal towards the fixed charge (like a projectile) at a speed of v
Find the minimum separation between the two charges if the velocity becomes 1/√3 times of the projected velocity at this moment (assume gravity to be absent)

Homework Equations



1) F= (k2Qq) / (R^2) where (k=1/4∏ε)

The Attempt at a Solution



Since the gravity is absent, should I use acceleration of the +2q charge instead of gravity (which can be found out from (1) as mass of +2q is M)
I have tried this method but somewhere I'm getting wrong as I cannot reach the answer
pls help me as I have been trying this from past 2 days.
the correct answer is (√3/2)R
 
Physics news on Phys.org


This is worded as an Energy Conservation question, so use V(r) ... but you also need to conserve angular momentum around the fixed charge (M v1 R1 sin 150 = M v2 R2).
 


Ok.. so is this the way ?
M (√3/2)v R1 (1/2) = M (v/2) R2
therefore , R2 = (√3/2)R1
(so what is the use of energy conservation?)

and I was thinking about the path of +2q charge. It would be repelled by the +Q charge, so it shouldn't move towards the +Q charge. So how will the path of +2q charge be?? away from it or something else?
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top