Electric field at the origin of a quarter-circle

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the electric field at the origin due to a uniformly distributed negative charge -Q along a quarter-circle of radius a in the first quadrant. The initial approach using the formula V = ∫kdQ/r was incorrect because it treated r as constant instead of a. The correct method involves differentiating the potential with respect to the angle θ and integrating to find the x- and y-components of the electric field. The final expressions for the electric field components are derived from the correct integration of the charge distribution along the arc.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric potential and electric field concepts
  • Familiarity with calculus, particularly differentiation and integration
  • Knowledge of charge distribution and its effects on electric fields
  • Experience with polar coordinates and trigonometric functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric fields from potential using integration techniques
  • Learn about charge distributions and their impact on electric fields in different geometries
  • Explore the use of polar coordinates in solving electrostatics problems
  • Investigate the relationship between electric potential and electric field in various configurations
USEFUL FOR

Students studying electromagnetism, physics educators, and anyone involved in solving electrostatics problems, particularly those related to charge distributions and electric fields.

henry3369
Messages
194
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Negative charge -Q is distributed uniformly around a quarter-circle of radius a that lies in the first quadrant, with the center of curvature at the origin. Find the x- and y-components of the net electric field at the origin.

Homework Equations


V = ∫kdQ/r
Eradial = -dV/dr

The Attempt at a Solution


V = ∫kdQ/r = -kQ/r
Eradial = -dV/dr = -(d/dr)(-kQ/r) = kQ(d/dr)(1/r) = kQ(-1/r2) = -kQ/r2 = -kQ/a2.

I don't know how to find the x- and y-components after solving for the magnitude.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
henry3369 said:
V = ∫kdQ/r = -kQ/r
Eradial = -dV/dr
That doesn't work. In the integration you took r as constant, i.e. you really mean a in this context, not r.
The electric field is found by differentiating the voltage, as a function of position, with respect to position. You have effectively differentiated wrt changing radius of arc.
Try again.
 
haruspex said:
That doesn't work. In the integration you took r as constant, i.e. you really mean a in this context, not r.
The electric field is found by differentiating the voltage, as a function of position, with respect to position. You have effectively differentiated wrt changing radius of arc.
Try again.
So I was able to solve this by differentiating with respect to θ, and using dθ = ds/Q, and dq = 2Qds/πa. Then integrating dE = (kdq/a2)cos(Θ) for the x component, and replacing cos with sin for the y-component then substituted the values into dE.

I'm still slightly confused as to why my first approach did not work. I just finished the electric potential unit in my book and it recommends finding potential first if you have to solve for E because potential only requires scalar addition. Then I did an example where I had to find the potential from a ring of charge along the x-axis, where I used V = ∫kdQ/r = kQ/r and got the correct answer. How does finding the potential in this problem differ?
 
haruspex said:
That doesn't work. In the integration you took r as constant, i.e. you really mean a in this context, not r.
The electric field is found by differentiating the voltage, as a function of position, with respect to position. You have effectively differentiated wrt changing radius of arc.
Try again.
Or similarly, finding the potential at the center of the ring, you can use V = ∫kdQ/r = kQ/r.
 
haruspex said:
That doesn't work. In the integration you took r as constant, i.e. you really mean a in this context, not r.
The electric field is found by differentiating the voltage, as a function of position, with respect to position. You have effectively differentiated wrt changing radius of arc.
Try again.
Hmm. I might have misread your post. Is my potential correct, but my approach at finding electric field incorrect? If so, is there any way to find electric field from potential in this problem rather than the approach I took above?
 
henry3369 said:
Hmm. I might have misread your post. Is my potential correct, but my approach at finding electric field incorrect? If so, is there any way to find electric field from potential in this problem rather than the approach I took above?
That's right, you have the potential correct but differentiating wrt the radius will not give you the field. To use the potential approach here you would need to find an expression for the potential as a function of position in relation to the origin, then differentiate wrt the position.
Easier here is to consider what direction the resultant field must be in, then, for each point on the arc (I assume it's an arc, not a quarter disc) find the component of the field it generates at the origin, in the desired direction. It looks like you have now done that, or something similar.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
582
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K