Finding the Equilibrium Position for Three Charges

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the equilibrium position for a third charge placed between two other positive charges, using Coulomb's law to analyze the forces acting on it.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to set up an equation based on the balance of forces from the two existing charges. Some participants question the method of cross multiplication and suggest a different approach to solving the equation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing feedback on the original poster's approach and raising questions about the use of the quadratic equation. There is no explicit consensus on the best method to proceed.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a preference from the original poster's professor to avoid the quadratic equation, indicating a potential constraint in the approach being considered.

Fireupchip
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A charge of 2.21E-9 C is placed at the origin, and a charge of 3.78E-9 C is placed at x = 1.60 m. Find the position at which a third charge of 2.94E-9 C can be placed so that the net electrostatic force on it is zero.

Homework Equations


Coloumb's law

The Attempt at a Solution



All 3 charges are positive, so for the net force to be zero, I believe that the 3rd charge will go in the middle of the other 2 charges.

+q1 |----1.60m - r -----| +q3 |------ r------| +q2

Knowns:
q1 = 2.21 x 10^-9 C
q2 = 3.78 x 10^-9 C
q3 = 2.94 x 10^-9 C
r (between q1 and q2) = 1.60 m

F1 = F2

the k and q3 both cancel, leaving me with:

q1 / (1.60m - r)^2 = q2 / r^2

I cross multiplied, giving me:

q1 / q2 = (1.60m - r)^2 / r^2

This is where I think I'm having a problem. From this point, I found 2 different answers, and both turned out to be wrong: 0.91m and 1.05m (both from q1). Can anyone please help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You didn't completely "cross multiply" (and I dislike that term). You did multiply on both sides by the denominator on the left, (160- r)^2. Now multiply on both sides by the denominator on the right to get (q1/q2)r^2= (160- r)^2. Multiply out the square on the right and you a quadratic equation to solve for r.
 
So if I multiply the square out on the right, there'll still be an r on the left side.
 
My physics professor said to avoid using the quadratic equation in this situation. Where am I going wrong?
 
Anyone?
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K