Help with Coulomb's Law: Solving for Charges on Identical Spheres

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saladsamurai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coulomb's law Law
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a problem using Coulomb's Law involving two identical conducting spheres that attract and then repel each other after being connected by a wire. The user encounters discrepancies in their calculations when attempting to derive the charges on the spheres, leading to nonreal answers in one attempt. Key errors identified include a misunderstanding of the sign in the equation representing the electrostatic force, which should account for the nature of the charges (one negative and one positive). The correct approach involves using the absolute values of the charges in the equations and recognizing the signs appropriately. Ultimately, the user is guided to correct their equations to achieve consistent and valid results.
Saladsamurai
Messages
3,009
Reaction score
7
!Coulomb's Law!

So I have already solved this one before, but I was redoing it fir practice when I encountered something that is troubling me. Depending on how I choose to solve my two equations, I get different results. Surely I am doing something wrong, but I cannot see it.

Problem
Two identical conducting spheres, fixed in place, attract each other with an electrostatic force of .108 N when their center-to-center separation is 50 cm. The spheres are then connected by a thin conducting wire. When the wire is disconnected, the spheres repel each other with an electrostatic force of .036 N. Of the initial charges on the spheres, with a positive net charge, what was the (a) negative charge of one of them and (b) the positive charge of the other?

Now I have used conservation of charge for after they connect and I end up with two equations and two unknowns:

F_e=\frac{kq_1q_2}{r^2}\Rightarrow q_1q_2=3.00(10^{-12}) (1)

F_e'=k\frac{(\frac{q_1+q_2}{2})^2}{r^2}\Rightarrow q_1+q_2=2.00(10^{-6}) (2)

Attempt 1:

If I solve (2) for q_1 then q_1=2(10^{-6})-q_2

plugging the above into (1) -q_2^2+2(10^{-6})q_2-3(10^{-12})=0 gets me a nonreal answer.

Attempt 2:

BUT if I solve (1) for q_1 then q_1=\frac{3(10^{-12})}{q_2} and plugging that into (2) I get q_2^2-2(10^{-6})q_2-3(10^{-12})=0 which solves correctly.

I am consistently of by a sign in the first attempt. Can anyone see what the problem is?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Saladsamurai said:
Attempt 2:

BUT if I solve (1) for q_1 then q_1=\frac{3(10^{-12})}{q_2} and plugging that into (2) I get q_2^2-2(10^{-6})q_2-3(10^{-12})=0 which solves correctly.

Wouldn't that be + (plus) 3e-12? (Resulting in an equivalent expression to than in attempt 1.)
 
neutrino said:
Wouldn't that be + (plus) 3e-12? (Resulting in an equivalent expression to than in attempt 1.)

No. Attempt 2 is correct. Attempt 1 is not.
 
Awaking this thread. I just went back to try this again and have the same problem... so conceptually, something is off.
 
Hi Saladsamurai,

In your original post you have an error in equation 1. There is then another mathematical error in method 2 that counteracts the error in equation 1 and gives the right answer.

For your equation 1, you have:

F_e=\frac{kq_1q_2}{r^2}\Rightarrow q_1q_2=3.00(10^{-12})

but that is not right. The formula for Coulomb's law is normally given in terms of magnitudes:

F_e=\frac{k |q_1||q_2|}{r^2}

and so you get:

<br /> |q_1 q_2|=3 \times 10^{-12}<br />

You know that either q1 or q2 is negative, and the other is positive, so your equation 1 should be:

<br /> q_1 q_2 = - 3 \times 10^{-12}<br />


In your method 2, the quadratic equation you get is the correct equation to get; however, it is not what you get from your original equations 1 and 2 in your post. If you use your original equations, the 3\times 10^{-12} term turns out to be positive, which gives the same (nonreal) answer as method 1.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top