Integrating an inverse square to find U

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving Electric Potential Energy using integration of the work equation. The integration from r_a to r_b results in the expression kQq(1/r_a - 1/r_b), which requires understanding the power rule in calculus. The anti-derivative leads to r^-1 in the numerator, and applying the definite integral yields the difference between the upper and lower limits. There is a question about whether to switch the sign due to the relationship between work and potential energy. Clarification on these calculus concepts is essential for understanding the derivation.
Imabioperson
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

This is probably going to come off as a very silly question. However, I have not had calculus in several years. I was angry that my physics textbook did not have a derivation of Electric Potential Energy. So, I finally came across it, and I see that the integration of the work equation from some point, r_a to another point, r_b yields, kQq (1/r_a - 1/r_b). Can someone explain to me where, (1/r_a - 1/r_b) is coming from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds like you realize it's a calculus issue. Review the power rule.
 
So, if you take the anti-derivative FIRST... we yield r^-1 in the numerator. And then, we will take the definite integral, leaving us with (1/upper limit - 1/lower limit)? And then do I switch the sign because of the relation between Work and Potential energy?
 
Last edited:
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top