How Does a Negative Charge Move Near an Infinite Line of Positive Charge?

Void123
Messages
138
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Consider a negative charge placed initially at a distance r_{0} from an infinite line with positive charge density \lambda. The charge is given an initial velocity of magnitude v_{0} parallel to the line of charge.

Find an expression for the trajectory of the particle in which time has been eliminated. This expression relates the distance traveled by the charge parallel to the line and the distance traveled perpendicular to the line.

Homework Equations



m\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\ddot{r}}(x, y) = q\stackrel{\rightarrow}{E}

The Attempt at a Solution



Using the Gaussian integral, I calculated the electric field

E\propto\frac{\lambda}{r}

I found that x=v_{0}t

Since the charge has an initial velocity in the horizontal direction and a force acting on it in the vertical direction due to the electric field, I know that it will follow a projectile motion as it travels parallel to the line.

How would I eliminate time from my equations? And would my final expression be some r(x, y) of the parabolic type?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have mad some progress, I think. I just need someone to check my work.

Hence:

\vec{V} = \frac{d\vec{r}}{dt} = \frac{qEt}{m}\hat{\bold{j}} + v_{0}\hat{\bold{i}}

\vec{r} = \frac{qEt^{2}}{2m}\hat{\bold{j}} + v_{0}t\hat{\bold{i}} + r_{1}\hat{\bold{j}}

\vec{r} = (\frac{qEt^{2}}{2m} + r_{1})\hat{\bold{j}} + v_{0}t\hat{\bold{i}}

Where r_{1} is just the initial distance of the charge from the infinite line.

So,

x = v_{0}t (1)

y = \frac{qEt^{2}}{2m} + r_{1} (2)

Substituting t from (1) into (2) and replacing E with \frac{k\lambda}{r_{1}}, I should get a final formula relating y, the distance perpendicular to the line of charge, to x the distance traveled parallel to the line of charge, with the elimination of time.

I just need someone to corroborate this.
 
Isn't the value of E a function of y (and therefore t)?
 
Donaldos said:
Isn't the value of E a function of y (and therefore t)?

I think you're right.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top