Electric potential:Potential difference of test charge

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 1K views
yuminie
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A positive test charge of 1.5uC is placed in an electric field, 10 cm from another charge of -5.0uC that is anchored in place. What is the potential difference between the initial position of the test charge, and a point 5 cm closer to the negative charge?
Relevant Equations
Ee=kq1q2/r
Δv=ΔEe/q
v=kq/r
Electric potential energy at initial:
Ee=kq1q2/r
=(9 ×10 ^9×1.5×10^-6×(-5)×10^-6)/0.1
=-0.675J
Electric potential energy at the closer point:
Ee=kq1q2/r
=(9 ×10^9×1.5×10^-6×(-5)×10^-6)/0.05
=-1.35J
Δv=ΔEe/q
=(-1.35+0.675)/1.5×10^-6
=4.5×10^5V

or:

Initial position:
v=kq/r
=9 ×10^9×1.5×10^-6/0.1
=13500v
closer position:
v=kq/r
=9 ×10^9×(-5)×10^-6/0.05
=-900000v
Δv=-900000-13500=-913500V

I am very confused on this question. Please send help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
yuminie said:
What is the potential difference between the initial position of the test charge, and a point 5 cm closer to the negative charge?
Note that they are asking about the potential due to the field of the anchored charge, not potential energy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: yuminie
Doc Al said:
Note that they are asking about the potential due to the field of the anchored charge, not potential energy.
Hi, thank you for your reply, this is how I changed my answer:
Initial position:
v=kq/r
=9 ×10^9×(-5)×10^-6/0.1
=-450000v
closer position:
v=kq/r
=9 ×10^9×(-5)×10^-6/0.05
=-900000v
Δv=-900000+450000=-450000V
Since its due to the field of the anchored charge, the charge of the test charge would not be needed?
Thanks.
 
yuminie said:
Since its due to the field of the anchored charge, the charge of the test charge would not be needed?
Yes, that's how I interpret the problem.
 
Doc Al said:
Yes, that's how I interpret the problem.
Thank you so much!