Electric potential due to two point charges near origin

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the electric potential V at a point (x,y,z) near the origin due to two fixed point charges +q located at (±a,0,0). The potential is expressed as V = [q/4∏*ε*a] [[2+(2x²-y²-z²)/a²], with x, y, and z being small compared to a. The user initially attempted to use the superposition principle and binomial expansion to derive the potential from each charge but encountered difficulties in achieving the desired result. After further reflection, the user realized the need to retain terms up to the second order in their calculations. This highlights the importance of careful approximation in problems involving electric potential from multiple point charges.
raving_lunatic
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A charge + q is fixed at each of the two points (±a,0,0). Show that the potential V at a point (x,y,z) near to the origin may be expressed as

V = [q/4∏*ε*a] [[2+(2x2-y2-z2)/a2]
where x, y and z are small compared with a.


Homework Equations



V(x) = q/4∏i*ε*r , where r is the distance between the point charge and x and V is the potential at x.

Superposition, i.e. V due to multiple point charges = the sum of V due to each point charge

(1+x)^n = 1+nx+... valid for small x.

The Attempt at a Solution



This seemed like an incredibly straightforward problem, which is probably why it's quite frustrating. I tried adding together the potentials due to each point charge, approximated using the binomial expansion:

V(q1) = q/4∏ε[(x+a)2 + y2 +z2]^-1/2

V(q2) = q/4∏εa[(a-x)2 + y2 +z2]^-1/2

Taking a out of the brackets as a common factor gives:

V(q1) = q/4∏εa [(x/a + 1)2+ (y2+z2)/a2)]^-1/2

and a similar expression for V(q2) but with (1-x/a)2.

I then expanded the squares and used (2x/a + (x2+y2+z2)/a2) as a small parameter to perform the binomial expansion; this gave

V(q1) = q/4∏εa [1 - x/a - (x2+y2+z2/2a2)]

V(q2) = q/4∏εa [1 + x/a - (x2+y2+z2/2a2)]

Which doesn't lead to the desired result when added; where did I go wrong?
 

Attachments

  • potential.png
    potential.png
    4.8 KB · Views: 571
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I've worked it out; need to keep the terms to the second order. Sorry.
 
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 '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