Field lines near the equilibrium point

scotshocker
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Charges 4q and -q are located at the points (-2a,0,0) and (-a,0,0), respectively. Write down the potential θ(x,y) for points in the xy plane, and then use a Taylor expansion to find an approximate expression for θ near the origin, which you can quickly show is the equilibrium point. (You can set a=1 to make things simpler)

Homework Equations


θ(x,y,s)=∫(ρ(x',y',z')dx'dy'dz')/4πεr


The Attempt at a Solution


setting a-1, ignoring the factor of q/4πε0, the potential due to the two charges, at locations in the xy plane is θ(x,y)=(1/(sqrt((x-2)2+y2)-(1/sqrt((x-1)2+y2)

Have I set this equation up correctly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF;
Have I set this equation up correctly?
... how would you check?

i.e. is the equilibrium point at the origin as the problem says?
(Notice that one of the charges is much bigger than the other? Have you accounted for that?)

Have you checked that you have added the vectors properly - say, by sketching them out head-to-tail?
 
Last edited:
Hello, scotshocker. Welcome to PF!

ignoring the factor of q/4πε0, the potential due to the two charges, at locations in the xy plane is
θ(x,y)=(1/(sqrt((x-2)2+y2)-(1/sqrt((x-1)2+y2)

Have I set this equation up correctly?

Looks good except for a couple of signs. At what values of x would you expect the potential to be undefined?
[EDIT: And as Simon points out, the charges are not of equal magnitude.]
 
Last edited:
The fact that the one charge is larger than the other is the part that I am having trouble with. I am also confusing myself because both charges are on the same side of the origin. I am severely out of practice and am just trying to figure this out. Any suggestions?
 
The charges are also opposite signs.
Perhaps you'd better write down the equation for the potential along just the x-axis to start with - don't leave off the q and the a this time: I think you removed them too soon, before you understood the situation.
Once you see that, you'll probably make the connections you need.

Actually draw the axes - mark out x=0, x=+a, x=+2a, x=-a, x=-2a, etc.
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top