How can voltage between unlike charges decrease with proximity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brian_D
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread 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 'Minimum mass of a block'
Here we know that if block B is going to move up or just be at the verge of moving up ##Mg \sin \theta ## will act downwards and maximum static friction will act downwards ## \mu Mg \cos \theta ## Now what im confused by is how will we know " how quickly" block B reaches its maximum static friction value without any numbers, the suggested solution says that when block A is at its maximum extension, then block B will start to move up but with a certain set of values couldn't block A reach...
TL;DR Summary: Find Electric field due to charges between 2 parallel infinite planes using Gauss law at any point Here's the diagram. We have a uniform p (rho) density of charges between 2 infinite planes in the cartesian coordinates system. I used a cube of thickness a that spans from z=-a/2 to z=a/2 as a Gaussian surface, each side of the cube has area A. I know that the field depends only on z since there is translational invariance in x and y directions because the planes are...
Thread 'Calculation of Tensile Forces in Piston-Type Water-Lifting Devices at Elevated Locations'
Figure 1 Overall Structure Diagram Figure 2: Top view of the piston when it is cylindrical A circular opening is created at a height of 5 meters above the water surface. Inside this opening is a sleeve-type piston with a cross-sectional area of 1 square meter. The piston is pulled to the right at a constant speed. The pulling force is(Figure 2): F = ρshg = 1000 × 1 × 5 × 10 = 50,000 N. Figure 3: Modifying the structure to incorporate a fixed internal piston When I modify the piston...
Back
Top