How can voltage between unlike charges decrease with proximity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brian_D
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between electric potential (voltage) and force as described by Coulomb's law. It highlights confusion regarding how voltage can decrease with proximity between unlike charges while force increases. The key point is that while the force increases as charges get closer, the work done to move a test charge also accumulates over distance, leading to a decrease in electric potential. The resolution lies in understanding that voltage is related to the cumulative work done, not just the force at a given moment. Ultimately, the concepts align when considering the cumulative nature of work in the context of electric potential.
Brian_D
Gold Member
Messages
77
Reaction score
16
Homework Statement
This is an elementary question about voltage and Coulomb's law, not a homework problem per se.
Relevant Equations
##F=(K*qa*qB)/d^2##
##electric~potential~difference=(Fd)/q'##
The first equation is Coulomb's law and the second is an equation for electric potential difference (voltage), where work done on the charge is Fd, that is, the force applied to the charge times the distance over which the force is applied. And where q' is the test charge. What confuses me is a diagram and statement in one of my physics textbooks, Paul Zitzewitz, Glencoe Physics: Principles and Problems, p. 490; the relevant diagram and statement are attached.

The book says regarding part (a) of the diagram, that electric potential is smaller when two unlike charges are closer together. I am not following this. Yes, the second equation says that as the distance decreases, the potential decreases. But how is this compatible with Coulomb's law? The latter says that the force INCREASES with proximity, so how can the potential decrease with proximity?

voltage vs. Coulomb's law.webp
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess you should do the maths, as they say. Force isn't voltage.
 
The math doesn't make sense to me, which is why I'm asking the question. Each equation makes sense in itself, but I don't understand how the two of them are consistent. Voltage is not force, but it seems related to force, namely the work needed to move a test charge. Since unlike charges attract, it takes positive work to separate them, but the further apart they get, the LESS work it takes, right? This is consistent with Coulomb's law. Doesn't this mean the further apart the charges, the LESS voltage between them? But the textbook is saying the exact opposite. My problem is not with the math, but with the concepts.
 
You really ought to be able to resolve this for yourself. There is no conceptual difficulty if you do the calculations.

Each charge must do more work on the test charge over the greater distance. Whatever work it does over a short distance is does that and more over the longer distance.

Also, look at the force against distance profile for each charge in each case.

Or, set one charge to zero and see what happens.

There are many ways to see this.
 
You said, "Whatever work it does over a short distance it does that and more over the longer distance." Thank you, this answers my question. I had not been thinking about the work as cumulative, but now I see that it is.
 
Thread 'Correct statement about size of wire to produce larger extension'
The answer is (B) but I don't really understand why. Based on formula of Young Modulus: $$x=\frac{FL}{AE}$$ The second wire made of the same material so it means they have same Young Modulus. Larger extension means larger value of ##x## so to get larger value of ##x## we can increase ##F## and ##L## and decrease ##A## I am not sure whether there is change in ##F## for first and second wire so I will just assume ##F## does not change. It leaves (B) and (C) as possible options so why is (C)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K