Can mv^2 /2 + mu^2 / 2 + kq^2 / L = kq^2 /X? Find Out!

  • Thread starter Thread starter A13235378
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an equation involving kinetic energy, potential energy, and the concept of reduced mass in a two-body problem with a central force. Participants are trying to understand the validity of the equation mv^2 /2 + mu^2 / 2 + kq^2 / L = kq^2 /X in the context of the problem presented.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the clarity of the problem statement, particularly regarding the translation and interpretation of terms. There are discussions about the implications of ignoring gravitational interactions and the relevance of reduced mass in the context of the equation. Some participants are also considering the conditions under which the equation might hold true.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants seeking clarification on the problem setup and exploring different interpretations of the equation. Some guidance has been offered regarding the concept of reduced mass, but there is no explicit consensus on the validity of the equation itself.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of language barriers affecting comprehension, and some participants express the need for a clearer problem statement. The original poster's understanding of the problem may be influenced by translation issues.

A13235378
Messages
50
Reaction score
10
Homework Statement
Two identical particles with velocities u and v, which form angles α and β with the straight line that joins them, are at a distance l from each other. The charge of each particle is q. Determine the mass of the particles, knowing that the minimum distance between the two is X. Despise the gravitational interaction.
Relevant Equations
mv^2 /2
kq^2 /d
1596743358220.png
I can only say that:

mv^2 /2 + mu^2 / 2 + kq^2 / L = kq^2 /X

Yes or not and why?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Whatever translation software you are using isn't very good. "knowing that the minimum distance between the two is worth" sounds like a critical part of the problem, and I have no idea what that means. As for "Despise the gravitational interaction", I already do. :wink: We can't help you if we don't understand you.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Whatever translation software you are using isn't very good. "knowing that the minimum distance between the two is worth" sounds like a critical part of the problem, and I have no idea what that means. As for "Despise the gravitational interaction", I already do. :wink: We can't help you if we don't understand you.

Sorry , I am spanish , my english is not very good. I already correct.
 
A13235378 said:
Sorry , I am spanish , my english is not very good. I already correct.
And "Despise the gravitational interaction" means to ignore the gravitational attraction between the masses, right?

(I also edited your thread title for you to make it a bit clearer) :smile:
 
berkeman said:
And "Despise the gravitational interaction" means to ignore the gravitational attraction between the masses, right?

(I also edited your thread title for you to make it a bit clearer) :smile:
yeah
 
Are you familiar with reducing a two-body problem with a central force to a one-body problem with a reduced mass ##\mu##? For example, see this .

It seems to me that you will be able to find only the reduced mass. You won't be able to find the individual masses of the two particles.
 
A13235378 said:
mv^2 /2 + mu^2 / 2 + kq^2 / L = kq^2 /X
That would be true if they were stationary at closest approach. Will that be so?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TSny
TSny said:
It seems to me that you will be able to find only the reduced mass. You won't be able to find the individual masses of the two particles.
It says they are identical...
 
Maybe we should wait for a problem attempt.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
Maybe we should wait for a problem attempt.

But I was about to post my Excel simulation as a cross-check for the OP to check their work. Oh, wait... :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K