Electric force distance problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the position of a third charge in relation to two other point charges on the y-axis, such that the net electric force acting on it is zero. The first charge is positive, while the second charge is negative, and the third charge is also positive. Participants are exploring the conditions under which the forces exerted by the two other charges can cancel each other out.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to consider the forces between all three charges and question the correct setup for the force equations. There is exploration of the regions where the third charge could be placed and the implications of those placements on the direction of the forces.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their calculations and questioning each other's reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the setup of the equations and the importance of considering the distances correctly. There is no explicit consensus yet, as different interpretations and calculations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of correctly identifying the distances between the charges and ensuring that the forces are set up properly. There is also mention of potential arithmetic errors in calculations, and the need to express final answers in terms of the distance from the origin as specified in the problem.

Punchlinegirl
Messages
221
Reaction score
0
Two point charges lie on the y-axis. A third charge q is placed somewhere in space such that the resultant force on it is zero. What distance from the origin must this third charge be placed such that the resultant force on it is zero? Answer in units of m.
The first charge is 8\mu C and is located at 0.5 m.
The second charge is -37 \mu C and is located at -1 m
The third charge is 8 \mu C.
I know that this third charge needs to be on the y-axis and for the force to be zero, the forces have to cancel each other out.
so I found the F on 1 & 2 by k(8e-6 *37e-6)/ (1.5^2)
and got this to be 1.184
Then I found F from 1 & 3 by k(8e-6*8e-6)/r^2
solving for r gave me .697, which I added to .5, b/c the third charge is above the 1st one. This gave me 1.2 m,which isn't right.. can someone please help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
when you place the third charge at position r with respect to the origin of the XY-plane, you will have THREE forces in total that have to cancel out.

1) F on charge 1 and 2 (the one you calculated first)
2) F on charge 1 and 3 : what is the equation ?
3) F on charge 2 and 3 : what is the equation ?

Then 1) + 2) + 3) = 0 and solve for r. You will get two r-values of which one shall be correct.

regards
marlon
 
Ok so for F_13 I used k(8e-6*8e-6) /R^2 = .576/r^2
and for F_ 23 I used k(37e-6 * 8e-6) / R^2 = 2.664/r^2
then I added 1.184, which was my previous answer for F_12, and .576/R^2 and 2.664/r^2 = 0. Solving for R gave me 1.65... am I doing this right?
 
You are trying to make the net force on the third charge equal zero, so there are only two forces to consider: F_13 & F_23. (F_12 is irrelevant.)

First question to answer is in what region must the third charge be placed to possibly get zero net force on it? Only three choices: y > 0.5; 0.5 > y > -1.0; y < -1.0. Hint: What must be the relative direction of the two forces in order for them to cancel?

Once you've figured out the right region, then you can set up your force equation to solve for the exact position. (Hint: The coulomb constant and the micros will all cancel out, so don't do any arithmetic until the last moment.)
 
I think that it has to be in the positive y-axis, so >0.5.
then would I just do:k*q1*q3 /r^2 = -k*q2*q3/r^2 ?
 
Punchlinegirl said:
I think that it has to be in the positive y-axis, so >0.5.
Right.

then would I just do:k*q1*q3 /r^2 = -k*q2*q3/r^2 ?
No, the distances are not equal. (That equation simplifies to q1 = -q2; does that make sense?)

Instead, call the position of the third charge y. Now find the distance between y and the other charges. Then set the magnitude of the two forces equal and solve for y.
 
So would it be q1*q3/ (0.5 + Y)= q2*q3/ (1.5 + Y)?
 
Punchlinegirl said:
So would it be q1*q3/ (0.5 + Y)= q2*q3/ (1.5 + Y)?
That will work. You've defined "Y" as the distance above the first charge--nothing wrong with that. But be sure to express your final answer in terms of distance from the origin as requested in the problem statement.

Edit: You forgot to square your distances; Your equation should read:
q1*q3/ (0.5 + Y)^2 = q2*q3/ (1.5 + Y)^2
 
Last edited:
Solving for y gave me .224, I add this to 0.5 right?
 
  • #10
If that's the answer for Y, then you add it to 0.5. But I would check that answer.

Note: I failed to point out that you left out the squares in your last equation. (I assume you were aware of that.)
 
  • #11
I forgot the squares earlier...
so (8e-6)(8e-6)/(.5+ y)^2= (8e-6)(37e-6)/ (1.5+ y)^2
Solving for y, gave me .369, which I added to .5 to get .869 which still isn't right... what am I doing wrong now?
 
  • #12
Punchlinegirl said:
Solving for y, gave me .369 ...
I get a slightly different answer. Write out your quadratic equation so we can take a look.
 
  • #13
I cross multiplied and got,
(6.4e-11)(2.25+3y+y^2) = 2.96e-10(.25+y+y^2)
1.44e-10+1.92e-10y+6.4e-11y^2= 7.4e-11+2.96e-10y +2.96e-10y^2
Then my quadratic came out to be -2.32e-10y^2 -1.04e-10y + 7e-11= 0Then by the quadratic formula I got .369
 
  • #14
Your equation looks OK to me, but your solution does not. Maybe you messed up in plugging into the formula.
Punchlinegirl said:
I cross multiplied and got,
(6.4e-11)(2.25+3y+y^2) = 2.96e-10(.25+y+y^2)
You can save yourself a lot of exponents (and opportunity for arithmetic error) by canceling things out before going any further. I'd write this step as:
8(2.25+3y+y^2) = 37(.25+y+y^2)

Do you see what I did?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K