Comparing 100J and -100J of Electric Potential Energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether 100 J of electric potential energy is greater than -100 J. Both values have the same magnitude, but the sign indicates the work done to move a +1C charge to those potentials. Positive work is required to bring the charge to the 100 J point, while negative work is associated with the -100 J point, indicating energy is released. It is concluded that the 100 J configuration has 200 J more potential energy than the -100 J configuration. The conversation highlights the need for context to clarify the question's intent.
rpthomps
Messages
182
Reaction score
19
Is the 100 J of electric potential energy actually greater than -100 J of electric potential energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They have the same magnitude but the sign is the indication of the work done (energy needed) to bring a +1C of charge from an infinite distance to points with those two potentials. The definition is that Positive work is needed to bring +1C to the +110J point (pushing up a hill) but negative work is done (i.e. energy is got out) then the +1C is brought to the -100J point (sliding down to a valley).
 
rpthomps said:
Is the 100 J of electric potential energy actually greater than -100 J of electric potential energy?
Given the way the question is phrased and the units that are used, I would interpret it to be about the potential energy of two configurations of the same system. One with a potential energy 100 J more than an arbitrary reference potential and one with 100 J less than the arbitrary reference.

Clearly, one has 200 J less electrical potential energy than the other.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and sophiecentaur
jbriggs444 said:
Given the way the question is phrased and the units that are used, I would interpret it to be about the potential energy of two configurations of the same system. One with a potential energy 100 J more than an arbitrary reference potential and one with 100 J less than the arbitrary reference.
Clearly, one has 200 J less electrical potential energy than the other.
Sounds fair and I can't find fault with that. The question could either require a totally theoretical answer or something practical. We would need the OP to give us a bit of help with the context. What does he actually want to know and why?
Can @rpthomps help us to help him more, please?
 
  • Like
Likes jbriggs444
sophiecentaur said:
The question could either require a totally theoretical answer or something practical.
Or it might have the syntax of a question but be devoid of semantics.
 
Thanks guys for the response! The question, was answered, as intended by @sophiecentaur but @jbriggs444 brought up another way of thinking about it.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top