Confusion about electric potential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of electric potential and potential energy in the context of moving a negative charge in the electric field of a positive charge. Participants explore the relationship between electric force, potential energy, and the mathematical formulation of electric potential, including the implications of calculus in understanding these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the formula for electric potential is KQ/r, given that the electric force changes along the path of displacement, suggesting a potential misunderstanding of the relationship between force and potential.
  • Another participant explains that integrating the force, which varies as 1/r², leads to the potential varying as 1/r, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between potential at a point and the change in potential energy between two points.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty about understanding these concepts without calculus, asking if there are alternative explanations.
  • Another participant suggests that graphical approximations could help in understanding the relationship between force and potential without calculus.
  • One participant asserts that learning calculus is essential for a deeper understanding of physics, citing historical context regarding Newton's contributions to the field.
  • Another participant reassures that the fundamental physics concepts can be grasped without calculus, explaining that potential energy is related to the area under the force vs. distance graph and that the zero of potential energy is conventionally set at infinity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of calculus for understanding electric potential and potential energy. While some advocate for the importance of calculus, others believe that the core concepts can be understood without it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to grasp these ideas.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the understanding of calculus and the implications of integrating force to find potential. The distinction between potential at a point and the change in potential energy is also highlighted but not fully resolved.

Inspiron
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
If I would displace a negative one-coulomb charge r meters from a positive charge, Q, the negative charge would gain electric potential energy that would be calculated by summing up all the values of the electric potentials along the line of its displacement, r. (I don't know calculus, but I have heard of integration.) Why then is the formula for electric potential KQ/r? Doesn't this come from multiplying the electric force at displacement r from Q with r? Why do we do that when the electric force is actually changing along the path of displacement and not constant? Is not this, for example, like multiplying the final acceleration of an object by the duration of the acceleration to find the final velocity, which is invalid because the acceleration is actually constantly changing along the path?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If you actually calculate out the integration, you'll find that if the force at every point goes as ##1/r^2## the potential at any point goes as ##1/r##.

The change in potential energy is the difference between the potential at the starting point and the potential at the ending point. It's also what you get by summing (as an integral) the change in the potential across each infinitesimal step along the path from starting point to ending point.

Do not confuse the change in the potential between two points separated by a distance ##r## and the potential at a point at a distance ##r## from the positive charge. The best way to keep it all straight is to use different letters for the different quantities in the problem:
##R_0##: the distance of the starting point from the central charge.
##R_1##: the distance of the ending point from the central charge
##\Delta{R}=R_1-R_0##: the distance the negative charge is displaced
##r##: a label for an arbitrary distance from the central charge. The potential energy at a point at a distance ##r## from the central charge is ##-KQ/r## and the attractive force is ##KQ/r^2##.

The potential energy gain when I move the charge a distance ##\Delta{R}## from the starting point at ##R_0## to the ending point at ##R_1## is ##KQ(1/R_1-1/R_0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Inspiron
Nugatory said:
If you actually calculate out the integration, you'll find that if the force at every point goes as ##1/r^2## the potential at any point goes as ##1/r##.
.

So should I take this for granted till I study calculus? Is not there any other way to understand it without calculus?
 
I don't know of another way. I suppose that you could graphically approximate it to convince yourself that it is correct.
 
Physics without calculus is much more difficult than physics with calculus. That's why Newton succeeded over all his predecessors and created a new kind of science, i.e., (theoretical) physics. So it's well spent time to learn calculus first!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
You should not be too concerned just yet about lack of calculus knowledge. The Physics ideas are straightforward.
You realize that point charges produce FORCES that are proportional to 1/r2 (inverse square law). POTENTIAL (energy) is a measure of work done and is therefore indicated by the area under F ~ distance graph. It is not difficult to verify that the area under 1/r2 graphs is proportional to 1/r.
This can be done manually by 'counting squares' under the 1/r2 graph. This is also known as integration (dreaded calculus) and for common functions such as 1/r2 standard formulae are well known.
Understanding calculus is undoubtedly a great 'tool' in the understanding of physical principles but the principles are not calculus !
Another majot aspect to be aware of is that the zero of POTENTIAL energy is taken to be at infinity (true also in gravitational fields) and this means that in some cases (such as gravitation) increasing POTENTIAL can give a max value of zero. In this case POTENTIAL must be a negative quantity
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K