Deflection distance for an electron beam in an electric field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the deflection distance of an electron beam in an electric field, specifically addressing a calculated value of 17.6 cm. Participants noted a potential error in the problem statement, suggesting that the correct deflection should be 1.76 cm due to a misplaced decimal point. The confusion arose from the direction of the electric field, which was initially misrepresented. Ultimately, the consensus is that the problem statement is flawed, leading to incorrect answer options.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic electromagnetism principles
  • Familiarity with electron beam dynamics
  • Knowledge of parallel plate capacitor configurations
  • Ability to interpret and analyze physics problem statements
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the principles of electron deflection in electric fields
  • Study the effects of electric field direction on charged particles
  • Examine common errors in physics problem statements and how to identify them
  • Learn about the design and analysis of parallel plate capacitors
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone involved in teaching or learning about electromagnetism and particle dynamics will benefit from this discussion.

Bolter
Messages
262
Reaction score
31
Homework Statement
See question below
Relevant Equations
F = qE
Have tried doing this question but I'm a bit confused on where I'm going wrong

Screenshot 2020-03-07 at 22.32.02.png

This is what I have done but get a value that doesn't match to any of the options given above?

IMG_4055.JPG


Any help would be really appreciated, Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I agree with your answer of 17.6 cm. Your work looks very good. But in your diagram, if the electric field is downward, would the electron be deflected downward?
 
TSny said:
I agree with your answer of 17.6 cm. Your work looks very good. But in your diagram, if the electric field is downward, would the electron be deflected downward?

Sorry my field line directions should be reversed (going from positive to negative)

So the question must have a mistake then I guess. I believe the first option would’ve been the right answer but maybe the person who wrote this misplaced the decimal point position and instead got 1.76cm and not 17.6cm :oldconfused:
 
Bolter said:
Sorry my field line directions should be reversed (going from positive to negative)

So the question must have a mistake then I guess. I believe the first option would’ve been the right answer but maybe the person who wrote this misplaced the decimal point position and instead got 1.76cm and not 17.6cm :oldconfused:
Yup. Given the question-given values the beam will impact the positive plate about halfway through the parallel plate channel. So original problem statement FAIL. This happens frustratingly frequently, especially when older problem sets are "updated" to change the working values to "refresh" the problem for new editions of texts or exams.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bolter and TSny

Similar threads

Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K