F = kQq/R2 finding force problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter xNick94
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the force between two charges using the formula F = kQq/R², specifically when the distance between the charges changes from 3m to 4.5m. Participants are exploring the implications of this change on the force experienced by the charges.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculation of the force based on the change in distance, questioning the appropriateness of rounding and the method of applying factors to determine the new force. There is also exploration of whether to multiply or divide by the factor derived from the distance change.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with each other's reasoning, with some providing guidance on how to correctly apply the factor derived from the distance change. There is recognition of confusion regarding the operations needed to find the new force value, and a productive dialogue is occurring around the mathematical principles involved.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing discussion about the accuracy of calculations, particularly regarding the use of decimal approximations versus fractions, and how these affect the final result. Participants are also considering the implications of the force decreasing as the distance increases, which is a fundamental concept in electrostatics.

xNick94
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Two charges Q1 amd Q2 jabe a force of 3.1x10^-8 N when the distance between them is 3m. Use the formula F = kQq/R2 to determine the force when the distance (R) between charge Q1 and Q2 increased from 3m to 4.5m

The Attempt at a Solution



My attempt was that
F = 1/R^2
k= 9.0x10^9

F=(3/4.5)^2
F=0.44N

3.1x10^-8 / 0.44
=.7 x10^-8

The answer being F = .7 x10^-8 N


Is that correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
xNick94 said:
Two charges Q1 amd Q2 jabe a force of 3.1x10^-8 N when the distance between them is 3m. Use the formula F = kQq/R2 to determine the force when the distance (R) between charge Q1 and Q2 increased from 3m to 4.5m

The Attempt at a Solution



My attempt was that
F = 1/R^2
k= 9.0x10^9

F=(3/4.5)^2
F=0.44N

3.1x10^-8 / 0.44
=.7 x10^-8

The answer being F = .7 x10^-8 N


Is that correct?

Up to (3/4.5)^2 I was fairly comfortable with.

From there on, not so much.
I think 0.44N was not such a great statement, but I know what you meant [it reads like a force value in Newtons]

Next I am not sure why you decided to divide by 0.44 - nor why you thought the answer was what you gave.

I don't think you should round of 4/9 to 0.44, and think more carefully about how to use that factor.
 
PeterO said:
Up to (3/4.5)^2 I was fairly comfortable with.

From there on, not so much.
I think 0.44N was not such a great statement, but I know what you meant [it reads like a force value in Newtons]

Next I am not sure why you decided to divide by 0.44 - nor why you thought the answer was what you gave.

I don't think you should round of 4/9 to 0.44, and think more carefully about how to use that factor.

Yes good idea, i'll stick with 4/9 instead of the decimal to preserve accuracy. Since F is proportional to 1/R^2. If R increases from 3 m to 4.5 m shouldn't the force decrease by a factor of (3/4.5)^2. And i thought decrease by a factor means divided by so i divide the original force by the force i got from the divide i did prior?

Edit: I just divided it the 4/9, it gives me 6.9x10^-8 ( i see why you suggested i'd use 4/9 )
 
xNick94 said:
Yes good idea, i'll stick with 4/9 instead of the decimal to preserve accuracy. Since F is proportional to 1/R^2. If R increases from 3 m to 4.5 m shouldn't the force decrease by a factor of (3/4.5)^2. And i thought decrease by a factor means divided by so i divide the original force by the force i got from the divide i did prior?

Edit: I just divided it the 4/9, it gives me 6.9x10^-8 ( i see why you suggested i'd use 4/9 )

It is common for people to confuse what to do with the factors.

You calculated a factor of 4/9 [good], and wanted to find the reduced force. That is, you wanted to get a smaller value for the Force.

How do you use 4/9 to get a smaller value?

Note: Some people get a factor of 9/4 [perhaps in error]. what should they do with a factor of 9/4 in order to get a smaller value?

And don't forget to apply your factor to the original value given!
 
PeterO said:
It is common for people to confuse what to do with the factors.

You calculated a factor of 4/9 [good], and wanted to find the reduced force. That is, you wanted to get a smaller value for the Force.

How do you use 4/9 to get a smaller value?

Note: Some people get a factor of 9/4 [perhaps in error]. what should they do with a factor of 9/4 in order to get a smaller value?

And don't forget to apply your factor to the original value given!

Hmm so was my original divide procedure justified from my explanation?
3.1x10^-8 / (4/9) = 6.9x10^-8 ...the force increased so this has to be wrong since it has to decrease right?
 
xNick94 said:
Hmm so was my original divide procedure justified from my explanation?
3.1x10^-8 / (4/9) = 6.9x10^-8 ...the force increased so this has to be wrong since it has to decrease right?

Yes - it is supposed to decrease.

I never bother too much which factor my students calculate [4/9 or 9/4], I just want them to think about how to effect the change needed.
If you want a smaller answer, and will be using a factor less than 1, you need to multiply.
If you want a smaller answer, and will be using a factor greater than 1, you need to divide.

Send me back your new answer then I will explain how I would have looked at/solved the problem.
 
xNick94 said:
Hmm so was my original divide procedure justified from my explanation?
3.1x10^-8 / (4/9) = 6.9x10^-8 ...the force increased so this has to be wrong since it has to decrease right?

Did you sort out where you went wrong? Only a single, simple error!
 
Sorry for the late reply, had to work and family friends were visiting.

If you want a smaller answer, and will be using a factor less than 1, you need to multiply.
If you want a smaller answer, and will be using a factor greater than 1, you need to divide.

PeterO said:
Did you sort out where you went wrong? Only a single, simple error!

Would you then have to multiply it since 4/9 is under 1.
3.1x10^-8 x 4/9 = 1.3 x 10^-8

Would the force be just 1.3x10^-8 or would i have to subtract that from 3.1x10^-8?
 
xNick94 said:
Sorry for the late reply, had to work and family friends were visiting.

Would you then have to multiply it since 4/9 is under 1.
3.1x10^-8 x 4/9 = 1.3 x 10^-8

Would the force be just 1.3x10^-8 or would i have to subtract that from 3.1x10^-8?

The multiplication is correct. Though you have merely "truncated" the answer rather than round it off - it should be 1.4 x 10^-8 when rounded to 2 figures.

Fortunately if you had subtracted 4/9 form 3.1 x 10^8 you would get approximately -4/9 and thus recognise it as wrong.

4/9 was a factor, and you either multiply or divide by factors.

Fractions are always a problem, because often work backwards: multiplying by them you get smaller, divide you get bigger.

The way I would have done it - which ultimately is numerically the same thing - is.

Since separation is changing from 3 to 4.5 - not an integer factor change - I would work on an interim separation of 1.5 m

This is half the first separation - meaning 4 x the force or 12.4 x 10^-8

I then change to 4.5.

This is 3 times the interim separation so it if F / 9 or 1.377778 x 10^-8

Rounding to 2 significant figure this is 1.4 x 10^-8

********** Be careful to always do calculations to as many figures as your calculator can handle - then at the end ROUND OFF, don't just chop off the last figures.**************
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K