Electric field strength at a point due to 3 charges

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the electric field strength at a point due to three charges, resulting in a proposed value of 13q for the new charge needed to balance the electric field to zero. The user applied the electric field equation and equated the contributions from the existing charges, seeking verification of their calculations. Other participants suggest providing more detailed steps in the solution to clarify the reasoning, particularly regarding the absence of 'x' in the equation and the sign choices for the terms. Overall, the consensus leans towards the correctness of the user's answer, pending further elaboration on the methodology. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clear problem-solving steps in physics calculations.
Tesla In Person
Messages
30
Reaction score
12
Homework Statement
Find the value of the charge placed at the point that makes the electric field 0.
Relevant Equations
Electric field: Kq /r^2
I got E. 13q as the answer. That is what i did: The electric field due to +q at origin 0 should equal the electric fields of charges -3q and the new charge placed at 2x. So applying the equation above like this; k*(q) / (2^2) = -3q*k + (k*C)/ 4 solving for C the new charge added, gives 13q. I don't know if it's correct because i don't have the answer to this question . Can you please check my working thanks.
 

Attachments

  • 3.PNG
    3.PNG
    30.2 KB · Views: 155
Physics news on Phys.org
Tesla In Person said:
Homework Statement:: Find the value of the charge placed at the point that makes the electric field 0.
Relevant Equations:: Electric field: Kq /r^2

I got E. 13q as the answer. That is what i did: The electric field due to +q at origin 0 should equal the electric fields of charges -3q and the new charge placed at 2x. So applying the equation above like this; k*(q) / (2^2) = -3q*k + (k*C)/ 4 solving for C the new charge added, gives 13q. I don't know if it's correct because i don't have the answer to this question . Can you please check my working thanks.
I think your answer is correct.
 
  • Like
Likes Tesla In Person
In order to make it easier for someone to follow your solution, you could show more steps. In particular, show why x does not appear in your equation and explain the choice of signs for the terms in your equation.
 
TSny said:
I think your answer is correct.
It must be if it really is "Tesla".
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Likes Tesla In Person and TSny
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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