Calculate E Field at x=6m | Graph E Field in x Direction from -3m to 11m

  • Thread starter Thread starter pyroknife
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field (E field) at x=6m due to two charges of 4x10^-6 C located at the origin and at x=8m. The calculated E field at x=6m is -8000 N/C, indicating a negative direction due to the influence of the charges. Participants emphasize the importance of considering the vector nature of the E field, noting that it is positive on the right side of x=0 and negative on the left. There is a correction regarding the graphical representation of the E field, highlighting that it should approach positive infinity from the right at x=0 and negative infinity from the left at x=8. The conversation concludes with a clarification on how to express the E field in a way that maintains the correct sign and direction.
pyroknife
Messages
611
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


2 charges of 4x10^-6 C are located at the origin and at x=8m y=0m.
Find the E field at x=6m. and graph the e field in the x direction with respect to x from -3m<x<11m


Homework Equations


E=kq/r


The Attempt at a Solution


sorry, idk how to use subscripts. If you see a number after a letter that means its a sub, E1 is for the charge at the origin.
E=E1-E2=kq1/r1^2 - kq2/r2^2
=(9x10^9)(4x10^-6)/2^2 - (9x10^9)(4x10^-6)/6^2= -8000 N/C


I attached my graph sorry for a crappy paint drawing. The curves should be more rounded.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    4.7 KB · Views: 505
Physics news on Phys.org
no, (1) the E-field is a vector, with direction away from positive charges.
(2) the "r" in the denominator (that is squared) is the distance from charge to field point.
so, is 2m for one charge, and 6m for the other charge.
 
lightgrav said:
no, (1) the E-field is a vector, with direction away from positive charges.
(2) the "r" in the denominator (that is squared) is the distance from charge to field point.
so, is 2m for one charge, and 6m for the other charge.

I don't understand what you mean with (1). and for (2) isn't 2 and 6 what I had for the 2 r's?
 
pyroknife said:
I don't understand what you mean with (1). and for (2) isn't 2 and 6 what I had for the 2 r's?

lightgrav is right about the vector part. Think about just E=kq/x^2 for q>0. If you plot that you get that E is positive on both sides of 0 like your graph shows. That's not right. The E field is negative on the left side of x=0 and positive on the right side of x=0. You put the 'vector' part in by hand to get the right answer by adjusting signs at x=6. You didn't adjust the signs in the general case of any x. Your graph doesn't even show a negative E field at x=6.
 
Last edited:
Dick said:
lightgrav is right about the vector part. Think about just E=kq/x^2 for q>0. If you plot that you get that E is positive on both sides of 0 like your graph shows. That's not right. The E field is negative on the left side of x=0 and positive on the right side of x=0. You put the 'vector' part in by hand to get the right answer by adjusting signs at x=6. You didn't adjust the signs in the general case of any x. Your graph doesn't even show a negative E field at x=6.

oh ok i think I see what you're saying. I got the -8000 N/C right though right? For the graph, my left, and right ones are right, but the middle one is opposite right? As in, for my middle plot the graph should be approaching positive infinity at x=0 from the right and approaching negative negative from the left at x=8?
 
pyroknife said:
oh ok i think I see what you're saying. I got the -8000 N/C right though right? For the graph, my left, and right ones are right, but the middle one is opposite right? As in, for my middle plot the graph should be approaching positive infinity at x=0 from the right and approaching negative negative from the left at x=8?

Yes, that sounds right. You can also write the field kq/x^2 as kqx/|x|^3 which always gets the sign right without putting it in by hand and also works for vectors. Do you see why?
 
Dick said:
Yes, that sounds right. You can also write the field kq/x^2 as kqx/|x|^3 which always gets the sign right without putting it in by hand and also works for vectors. Do you see why?

Yes I think so, the adding the x in the numerator will make the sign match the positive/negative distance, idk how to word it right.
 
pyroknife said:
Yes I think so, the adding the x in the numerator will make the sign match the positive/negative distance, idk how to word it right.

Good enough. If you think of v as a vector then kqv/|v|^3 will always have the same magnitude as kq/v^2 but it will point in the direction of v, like it's supposed to.
 
Back
Top