Distance from +4μC to Zero Potential: 24mm

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the distance from a +4 μC charge to a point where the electric potential is zero, given two charges, +4 μC and -16 μC, separated by 120 mm. The correct answer is identified as 24 mm, calculated using a ratio based on the charges' magnitudes. A participant expresses confusion about why only the magnitudes are used in calculations, leading to clarification that the correct approach involves setting the sum of potentials from both charges to zero. The participant acknowledges a mistake in their earlier calculations and decides to take a break to refocus on their studies. Understanding the principles of electric potential and charge interaction is crucial for solving such problems accurately.
mrcotton
Messages
120
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


photobucket4_zps0655b6ef.jpg

The diagram shows two charges, +4 μC and –16 μC, 120 mm apart. What is the distance from
the +4 μC charge to the point between the two charges where the resultant electric potential is
zero?
A 24mm
B 40mm
C 80mm
D 96mm

Homework Equations



potential equation

The Attempt at a Solution



photobucket3_zps880c633e.jpg

Homework Statement



The correct answer is a 24mm
I get that we could simply use a 1:4 ratio and therefore r must be a fifth of the way from the 4 micro coulomb charge
However when I try and equate the formula and solve algebraicaly I seem to get the wrong answer if I put in the sign of the charges.

So my question is why do we just use the magnitude of the charges?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


mrcotton said:
So my question is why do we just use the magnitude of the charges?
You seem to have written U1 = U2 when you should have used U1 + U2 = 0.
 


Thank you, I am a fool
I must take a break and do some maths in between my physics
 

Thread 'Rolling without slipping on a curved surface'

Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
View full post »

Thread 'Struggling to understand the concept of this question (ice cube in water optics question)'

TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
View full post »

Similar threads

How can voltage between unlike charges decrease with proximity?
Replies
4
Views
798
How do I solve where the absolute potential should be zero?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Why Is Work Positive When Done Against the Electric Field?
Replies
22
Views
3K
Van der Graaf Generator: Charge, Potential and Redesign Questions
Replies
8
Views
2K
Distances where electrostatic potential is zero
Replies
9
Views
4K
Zero Electric Potential Concept and Visualization
Replies
5
Views
3K
Minimizing the Energy of Two Conductors Very Far Apart
Replies
23
Views
2K
Potential Difference between 2 points
Replies
5
Views
4K
At what point is Electric Potential zero
Replies
2
Views
2K
Point charge with very thin metal sheet along a spherical surface
Replies
21
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top