Calculating Electric Potential Energy for a Charge Configuration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the total electric potential energy (TPE) for a specific charge configuration using the formula TPE=PE11+PE12+(PE13+PE23). The user expresses confusion about including the potential energy of charge 2 due to charge 3 while basing calculations on charge 1. Responses confirm that the equation is correct, noting that the PE11 term is unnecessary since it equals zero. The importance of considering interactions between all charge pairs is emphasized for accurate TPE calculation. Clarifications on notation preferences are also mentioned, highlighting the potential for confusion.
synergix
Messages
177
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Compute the electric potential energy for the charge configuration shown below.

http://webct6.nic.bc.ca/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/CourseMaterials/CourseContent_2007FA/Assignments/PHY060W_Assignment_07_files/image025.jpg


Homework Equations



TPE=PE11+PE12+(PE13+PE23)

The Attempt at a Solution



TPE=PE11+PE12+(PE13+PE23)
| TPE= 0J+[(q1KQ2)/r2] + [(q1KQ3)/r1 + (q2KQ3)/r3]
|
q1=-3.0 microcoloumb
q2=2.0microcoloumb
q3=5.0microcoloumb

| where q1 is charge 1, q2 and Q2 are charge 2, Q3 is charge 3, r1 is the distance between q1 and Q3, r2 is the distance between charge 1 and 2, r3 is the distance between q2 and Q3.

I have chosen charge one to base my calculations off. I had problems before with this question and I was instructed to find charge one due to charge one + PE on charge one due to charge 2 + (PE on charge 1 due to charge 3 + PE on charge 2 due to charge 3) I am not sure why I need to calculate the potential energy on charge 2 due to charge 3. So I need to know if my equation is correct and also why I need to calculate the potential energy of charge 2 due to charge 3 when I am using charge one to base my calculations off of?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Without seeing a figure showing the charges, I will say that the total potential energy is the potential due to each pair of charges.

Your equation looks correct. Not sure why you bothered with the "PE11" term, since it's just 0, or why you chose to use different symbols (q2 and Q2) for one of the charges. But it is correct. If the figure shows what r1, r2, and r3 are, you can go ahead and plug in the numbers.
 
Ok thanks I used the small q to indicate that it was the charge being acted upon by the big Q. I believe that is what is happening. its just personal preference I suppose albeit kinda pointless and possibly confusing if you don't know why I am doing that.
 
sorry for the double post
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top