Exploring the Paradox: Why Does q Lose Kinetic Energy?

In summary, the paragraph in the paint doc states that a positive charge q gains kinetic energy as it falls towards the negative plate. However, the accompanying graph shows that the positive charge q actually loses kinetic energy. The confusion arises from the use of the term "falling" which, in this context, means moving towards x = 0 on the graph. It is suggested that the labels for U (potential energy) and K (kinetic energy) are switched in the diagram if time is increasing from left to right. This would align with the written passage, which describes a charge starting at rest on one plate and accelerating towards the other, resulting in an increase in kinetic energy and decrease in potential energy.
  • #1
Miike012
1,009
0
Look inside the paint doc.
My question is why does the paragraph say ...A positive charge q gains kinetic energy as it falls towards the negative plate...

However the graph shows that the positive charge q loses kinetic energy...

I am confused what am I not understanding?
 

Attachments

  • qqqqqq.jpg
    qqqqqq.jpg
    12.7 KB · Views: 443
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
"Falling" appears to mean going toward x = 0, i.e. going left in the graph.
 
  • #3
I think the U and K labels are the wrong way round in the diagram if time is increasing to the right. K should be increasing and U should be decreasing if a charge starts at rest on one of the plates and accelerates to the other - which is what the written passage says.
 

1. What is the paradox of q losing kinetic energy?

The paradox of q losing kinetic energy refers to the observation that an object with mass q, when placed on a surface with friction, will eventually come to a stop even though it appears to have no external forces acting on it. This contradicts the law of conservation of energy, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred or transformed.

2. Why is this paradox important in the field of physics?

This paradox challenges our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics and forces us to question our current theories. It also has practical applications, such as in the design of systems that require minimal energy loss.

3. What are some possible explanations for this paradox?

One possible explanation is that there are small, imperceptible forces at play, such as air resistance or microscopic imperfections in the surface. Another explanation is that the energy is being converted into other forms, such as heat or sound.

4. How do scientists explore this paradox?

Scientists use a variety of methods, such as mathematical modeling, experiments, and simulations, to try and understand the factors that contribute to q losing kinetic energy. They also continue to develop new theories and conduct further research to try and explain this paradox.

5. What are some potential implications of solving this paradox?

If scientists are able to fully understand and explain why q loses kinetic energy, it could lead to advancements in various fields, such as transportation, energy efficiency, and material design. It could also help us gain a deeper understanding of the fundamental laws of physics and how they apply to our everyday lives.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
872
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
937
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
62
Views
4K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
935
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
686
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
383
Back
Top