Is the IB Physics HL Answer Key Wrong About Electrostatic Attraction?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter paulfr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ib Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a question from the IB Physics HL exam regarding the nature of electrostatic attraction between a positively charged rod and a nearby rod, with participants debating the validity of the answer key. The focus is on the characteristics of the second rod (S) and whether it can be charged or uncharged, as well as the implications of its material properties (insulator vs. conductor).

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that a negatively charged rod S can attract rod R, supporting the idea that statement I (rod S is charged) is valid.
  • Another participant contends that an insulator cannot maintain an induced charge, suggesting that only conductors can do so, thus supporting statements I and III.
  • Some participants assert that insulators can have induced charges, citing examples like a charged comb picking up paper, and argue that insulators can maintain charge due to their high resistance.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that while insulators can have induced charges, they may not maintain them effectively unless in direct contact with another object.
  • There is a claim that both statements II and III are valid, as they imply that rod S can be negatively charged relative to rod R.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the conditions under which charge induction occurs, particularly regarding the polarization of insulators and the effects of resistivity.
  • One participant questions the understanding of charge induction in insulators, referencing common demonstrations involving static electricity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of rod S or the validity of the answer key. Multiple competing views remain regarding the roles of insulators and conductors in electrostatic attraction.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying interpretations of how charge induction works in insulators versus conductors, with some noting that real-life objects are not perfect insulators. There are also discussions about the conditions necessary for charge to remain induced.

paulfr
Messages
193
Reaction score
3
IB High Level Physics Test Question

I have encountered a question whose answer I disagree with.
I think the answer is I and II , not the I and III on the answer sheet.

What do you think ?

=================
A positively charged rod R is suspended by insulating string.
When a stationary rod S is placed nearby, rod R is attracted towards it.

Consider the following statements regarding the possible nature of the rod S.
I. Rod S is charged.
II. Rod S is an uncharged insulator.
III. Rod S is an uncharged conductor.

Which statement(s) can explain the attraction of rod R to rod S?
A. I only
B. II only
C. III only
D. I and III only

=====================
Clearly a negatively charged Rod S can attract Rod R.
So "I" is ok.

But the conductor can not maintain the induced charge differential
needed to attract Rod R since any charge concentration / voltage
will cause a current eliminating charge build up.

However, an insulator can maintain an induced charge differential.

Did the International Bacalaureate HL Test writers get it wrong
or am I missing something ?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The insulator cannot get an induced charge - it is insulating.

The conductor will maintain the induced charge, as only this induced charge leads to zero field inside. The separated charges are the equilibrium, if there is an external field (=satisfied here).

I and III are right.
 
Thanks for the reply.

I think an insulator can have an induced charge.

Have you ever seen a charged comb pick up bits of paper ?
Paper is not a conductor but there is an induced charge and it is
maintained because it is an insulator.
Balloons, wool, amber and other insulators are used routinely in
electrostatic demonstrations.

A positively charged object will cause electrons to collect
near the positive field. The question is whether they will
stay there. It seems to me a conductor will not allow this.
But an insulator will since its resistance is high and thus
discharge time constant will be very long.
 
paulfr said:
I think an insulator can have an induced charge.
If it gets in direct contact with something, it can get a tiny amount of charge. Afterwards, it has a net charge. Both effects do not happen here. In addition, all real-life objects are not perfect insulators.

A positively charged object will cause electrons to collect
near the positive field. The question is whether they will
stay there. It seems to me a conductor will not allow this.
A conductors enforces this.
But an insulator will since its resistance is high and thus
discharge time constant will be very long.
It is the opposite, charging times will be very long (for real insulators).
 
II and III are definite yes, both are by definition negatively charged with respect to R. I is a maybe, if S is not positively charged relative to R then there will be attraction.
 
S is uncharged (has no net charge) in II and III.

"Which statement(s) can explain" -> so I is a definite yes, a net charge can explain an attraction.
 
mfb said:
The insulator cannot get an induced charge - it is insulating.

I always thought that sticking a balloon to the wall with static electricity was a demo of inducing a charge in the wall. Albeit without moving electrons though the insulator but by polarizing the particles at the surface. Is my understanding of this flawed?
 
I always thought that sticking a balloon to the wall with static electricity was a demo of inducing a charge in the wall.
With a direct contact. And the balloon is not a perfect insulator.
Polarization is a small effect compared to some net charges, I think.
 
MalachiK said:
I always thought that sticking a balloon to the wall with static electricity was a demo of inducing a charge in the wall. Is my understanding of this flawed?

No. It is correct IMO.

Paper [an insulator] bits stick to a charged plastic comb because
charge can be induced to redistribute in the paper and remain
so for a period of time depending on its resistivity.
Same for the wall holding the balloon.
 

Similar threads

High School A doubt on Electrostatics -- An electrified rod attracting light objects
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Undergrad Electrostatic polarization and paper bits attraction
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Pushing a rod in a magnetic field
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Can a neutral insulator be attracted to a charged object?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Undergrad Where to find this uniqueness theorem of electrostatics?
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
Graduate Faraday's Law & Motional EMF Confusion
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Graduate Definition of Conductor: What is a Conductor?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Intro to Electromagnetism: five conceptual questions
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Debugging a Kelvin Water Dropper
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Electric Fields and Charges Fill in the blanks
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K