Can a Charged Particle's Circular Trajectory Be Proven with Newton's Second Law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoberSteve2121
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge Figure
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that a charged particle's trajectory is circular using Newton's Second Law and the magnetic force equation F=q(V x B). Participants emphasize the importance of understanding the direction of the electromagnetic force relative to the particle's motion. There is a mention of a more complex problem involving an initial velocity at an angle to the magnetic field, which leads to a helical path. The conversation hints at the challenges of these physics problems, particularly for those seeking homework assistance. Overall, the thread highlights the relationship between magnetic forces and particle motion in a magnetic field.
SoberSteve2121
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
For a charged particle the Velocity Vector is in the i direction and the magnetic field is in the -k direction, prove using Newton's Second Law that the trajectory of this charged particle must be circular. (Hint F=q(V x B) this is the magnetic Force equation.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suspect that this belongs to the homework help zone.

How hard is that? Think of the direction of the electromagnetic force with respect to the particle's motion.
 
kuenmao said:
I suspect that this belongs to the homework help zone.

How hard is that? Think of the direction of the electromagnetic force with respect to the particle's motion.

Don't tell him that there's an even more "difficult" problem where the charge particle has an initial velocity at an arbitrary angle to the magnetic field. I'm sure we can't solve it to get the helical path that the charge particle makes.

:)

Zz.
 
I'm not sure the OP will get the sarcasm in that second statement, so...
 
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