Coulombic Force on Q from two particles

  • Thread starter Thread starter nateja
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Particles
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric force on a point charge Q due to two other charges using Coulomb's Law. The user initially attempted to find the force components but made errors in vector addition and notation. Corrections were suggested, emphasizing the need to properly account for the direction of forces and the correct application of vector addition. The user later recalculated the angle between the forces, leading to confusion regarding the correct angle measurement. Ultimately, the conclusion was that the angle should be 90 degrees based on a proper diagram and analysis of the charge configuration.
nateja
Messages
33
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Point charge 3.5microC is located at x = 0m, y = 0.30m , point charge -3.5microC is located at x= 0m y= -0.30m . What are (a)the magnitude and (b)direction of the total electric force that these charges exert on a third point charge Q= 4.5microC at x= 0.40m , y= 0m?


Homework Equations


These are the equations I've been using:

Coulomb's Law
F = k*(absolute_value(q1*q2)/r^2)

Law of Cosines
c^2 = a^2+b^2-2abcos(∅)

Magnitude of a Force
F = sqrt(Fy^2+Fx^2)


The Attempt at a Solution


1) I drew out the situation on a standard xy-plot. I then made a force diagram with Q as the origin and q2 .5m (used the pythagorean theorem to calculate this) from Q on the x-axis and q1 ∅ degrees from the x-axis and .5m from Q. I used the law of cosines to calculate ∅ (I got 73.7398 degrees)

2) set the sum of forces to:
= (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q2*Q)/r^2)*cos∅ + (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q2*Q)/r^2)*sin∅ + (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q1*Q)/r^2)

3)I then plugged in the values to the equations (I converted microC to C and had ∅)
and got Fx = .724792N and Fy = .543594N

4) I used the magnitude of a force equation and received the value .90599N

Any help would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nateja said:
2) set the sum of forces to:
= (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q2*Q)/r^2)*cos∅ + (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q2*Q)/r^2)*sin∅ + (1/4*pi*ε0)*(absolutevalue(q1*Q)/r^2)

It should be divided by (4*pi*ε0), not multiplied by (1/4*pi*ε0). Also, the horizontal component from charge 1 is going opposite to the horizontal component of charge 2, so one of the horizontal terms in the equation should have a negative sign in front of it.

EDIT: Even more importantly, you need to remember that you sum the horizontal components, to get the horizontal component of the force, and the vertical component you have already. But when you want to get the magnitude, you don't just add the horizontal and vertical components together. This is a vector we are talking about.
 
Thanks Bruce!

It was a problem with my vectors additions and I drew the force diagram completely wrong. Thank you also for pointing out my error in the notation I put up for the coulomb's law equation. I'll pay more attention to that next time.
 
So one last question about the 2nd part of the question

I calculated the angle between the 2 forces as:

∅= arctan(Fy/Fx) = -53.1301 degrees.

I used the same values for Fy and Fx that I used in part a and I got the answer correct for that. The question asked for the degrees clockwise from the positive x-direction. I figured the Fnet would be in the 4th quadrant (-x direction and +y direction) w/ -53.1301 degrees as the angle from the negative x-axis. So I added 180 degrees to 53 and I got the wrong answer.

the answer is 90 degrees, how??
 
I'm not sure where you got those angles from. But if you draw a diagram using the axes that were defined in the question, and look at the magnitudes of the distances and charges, then you can see that the answer must be 90 degrees.
 
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