Electric Potential due to multiple charges

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the concept of electric potential due to multiple charges, emphasizing that the electric potential (V) is determined by the formula V = kQ/r, where Q is the charge and r is the distance from the charge. It highlights that doubling the charge will double the potential, while increasing the distance will decrease the potential. Importantly, the potential at a point is independent of any test charge present. The relevance of the second charge in determining potential is deemed irrelevant in this context. Understanding these principles is crucial for solving problems related to electric potential.
irivce
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


bfPCQT1.png



Homework Equations



E = kq1q2/r2


The Attempt at a Solution



Please correct me if I am wrong but I think it is A. Since doubling the charge, doubles the potential as well, while doubling the radius between the charges would just exponentially decrease the electric potential. My question here is if that is the correct equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Be careful. This questions asks you which statement is true about the electric potential - not the electric field. Recall that the electric potential produced by a point charge Q is given by the expression:

##V = k \frac{Q}{r}##

where Q is the charge and r is the distance away from this charge. (This is the source charge).
 
So is it safe to say that the charge from the second point is irrelevant ?
 
That is correct. The electric potential at a point in space is independent of the test charge.

Some light reading from wikipedia for you (I especially recommend the introduction and the section titled electric potential due to a point charge): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_potential
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
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