Calculating the Field of a Charge in a Coordinate System

  • Thread starter Thread starter zezima1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Field
AI Thread Summary
In calculating the electric field of a charge relative to a coordinate system, both vertical and horizontal components are present. As the charge moves far along the x-axis, the horizontal distance becomes significantly larger than the vertical distance, leading to a question about the relevance of the vertical component. The vertical component's influence diminishes compared to the horizontal component due to the geometric relationship, where the ratio of vertical to horizontal components decreases linearly with distance while the field magnitude decreases quadratically. Consequently, in the far field limit, the vertical component becomes negligible as it approaches zero faster than the horizontal component. Ultimately, at large distances, it becomes reasonable to disregard the vertical component of the electric field.
zezima1
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Suppose you want to find the field of the charge q relative to the coorinate system on the picture. That won't be very hard to do and the field will in general have both a vertical and horizontal component. Now suppose we let the charge get very very far out on the x-axis, such that the horizontal distance to the origin is much much larger than the vertical distance from the origin to q.
My question is:
Will the vertical component of the force then be negligible compared to the horizontal? Because geometry does seem to suggest that, but on the other hand it is not really intuitive to me why. Evidently it is not like you are moving further away vertically than horizontally, it's rather the opposite.
 

Attachments

  • charge.png
    charge.png
    428 bytes · Views: 425
Physics news on Phys.org
zezima1 said:
Evidently it is not like you are moving further away vertically than horizontally, it's rather the opposite.

But, you are moving farther away from the charge. Hence, both components of the field get smaller, but the ratio of of vertical to horizontal component goes as d/x (which is the tangent of the angle) where d is the vertical offset. So, it's clear that the ratio drops linearly with distance, while the field magnitude drops as distance is squared.

For this reason I would say that the vertical component is negligible in the far field limit. In the limit as x goes to infinity, the vertical component of field goes to zero as 1/r^3 and the horizontal component goes to zero as 1/r^2. At some point along the way, you may want to neglect the vertical component.
 
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 .
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...
Back
Top