How Does the Potential of a Coalesced Drop Compare to Its Original Drops?

AI Thread Summary
When 27 identical charged drops coalesce into a single larger drop, the potential of the new drop is lower than that of the original drops. The total potential of the original drops is 27V, while the potential of the new drop, measured at its surface, remains V. This indicates that the potential of the original drops is 27 times greater than that of the combined drop. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding how potential changes when multiple charged bodies merge. The clarity of the question posed is also noted as a potential source of confusion.
captain.joco
Messages
32
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


27 drops of salt water with same radius, are each charged to a potential of V volts. They are made to coalesce into a single drop. How is the potential of a new drop compared to the potential of the original drops.

Homework Equations


V ( potential ) = k* q/r
k=1/(4∏ε.)


The Attempt at a Solution


I know that the total potential of collection of point charges is ( assuming we can take the drops as point charges ): Vtotal = k Σ q/r; so Vtotal should be 27V. Now if we add another drop and we measure the potential at the same distance as we have measure it from the original drops, the new drop will have potetntial V.
So from the ratio Vtotal/V can be seen that the original drops have a potential 27times bigger then a single new drop. Is this even nearly correct? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I THINK they mean how does the potential of a single drop in isolation measured at the surface of a single drop compare with the potential of the combined drops, again measured at the surface of the combined drop. I'm guessing that because the '27' is convenient number for this problem. The question isn't very clearly worded.
 
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