Electric field required to keep electron at rest

boiteporte
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


An electron is traveling through a magnetic field B=(Bx, By, Bz). Find an expressions for the electric field E required to keep the electron's velocity constant at v=(0,vy,0). Hence, show that E and B are perpendicular.

Homework Equations


F=q(v cross B)
F=qE

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok, I totally messed up this question. That's for sure. First, I decided to set the two forces equal to each other using q=-e since it is an electron. So, -e(v cross B)=eE (There are no minus signs on the right hand side, since it is going in the opposite direction).

So, E= -(v cross B). Then I had absolutely no idea what to do so the rest is probably wrong but, that's what I did (I decided to split it up in the 3 components) :

For the x-component, I got Ex=-(-vy*Bz)=vy*Bz
For the y-component, I got Ey=0
For the z-component, I got Ez=-(vyBx)=-vyBx

So, putting them altogether gives E=(vyBz,0,-vyBx). I don't think this answer is right though...

For the second part of the question, I said that the force is perpendicular to the magnetic field (as shown by the Lorentz Force equation) and since the force is parallel to the electric field, then the electric field is perpendicular to the magnetic field. I know there is a way to show it using Maxwell's Equation but the way the question is written implies that I have to use my previous answer. But I'd like some help please...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no mistake in your derivation.

For the second part, how could you check that two vectors are perpendicular?
 
Two vectors are perpendicular if their dot products equals 0. But, I still don't see where this is going...
 
Sorry for my previous reply. I understand now. I have E=(vyBz,0,-vyBx) and B=(Bx,By,Bz). So, their dot products is vyBzBx+0-vyBxBz=0. So, they are perpendicular. Is this correct now?
 
Yes, it is all correct. Well done!
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top