Magnitude of electric field at a point

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the magnitude of the electric field at a specific point (P) due to multiple charges. The original poster provides values for the charges and distances involved, and references the relevant equation for electric fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to treat electric fields as vectors and suggest using trigonometry to resolve components. There are attempts to calculate the electric field contributions from each charge, with some questioning the correctness of these calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on treating electric field vectors correctly, emphasizing the importance of direction and components. However, there is still confusion regarding the calculations and the resulting magnitude of the electric field, with no clear consensus reached on the correct approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the unit vector components and their derivation, particularly in relation to the geometry of the problem. There is mention of the correct answer being a single value, which adds to the complexity of the discussion.

roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



If Q = 80 nC, a = 3.0 m, and b = 4.0 m in the figure, what is the magnitude of the electric field at point P?

[PLAIN]http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/9703/72660756.gif

Homework Equations



[tex]\vec{E}=k_e \frac{q}{r^2}\hat{r}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



The magnitude of the electric field at P due to the first charge is:

[tex]E_1 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(2 \times 80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2+3^2)}=56.96[/tex]

due to the second charge it's:

[tex]E_2 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(-80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2)} = - 44.5[/tex]

And due to charge 3:

[tex]E_3 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(2 \times 80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2+3^2)}=56.96[/tex]

The total magnitude of the electric field at P would be: [tex]56.96-44.5+56.96 = 69.3[/tex]

But the correct answer is 47 N/C. Could anyone please show me what is wrong with my calculations?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
You must treat electric field as a vector! Draw the electric field vectors of each charge and with a little bit of trigonometry it should be no problem.
 
roam said:
[tex]\vec{E}=k_e \frac{q}{r^2}\hat{r}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



The magnitude of the electric field at P due to the first charge is:

[tex]E_1 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(2 \times 80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2+3^2)}=56.96[/tex]

due to the second charge it's:

[tex]E_2 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(-80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2)} = - 44.5[/tex]

And due to charge 3:

[tex]E_3 = (8.9 \times 10^9) \frac{(2 \times 80) \times 10^{-9}}{(4^2+3^2)}=56.96[/tex]

The total magnitude of the electric field at P would be: [tex]56.96-44.5+56.96 = 69.3[/tex]

But the correct answer is 47 N/C. Could anyone please show me what is wrong with my calculations?
Hello roam,

You need to treat the individual electric field contributions as vectors. Note the unit vector [itex]\hat r[/itex] in your

[tex] \vec{E}=k_e \frac{q}{r^2}\hat{r}[/tex]

equation. This unit vector is different for each charge you consider. It has both x and y components.

Express each electric field vector in terms of its x and y components, and then add them together. :wink:
 
Hi Collinsmark

I tried that, it didn't work:

[tex]\vec{E_1}=56.96 cos (90) \hat{i}+ 56.96 sin (90) \hat{j}[/tex]

[tex]= 56.96 \hat{j}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{E_2}=-44.5 cos (0) \hat{i}-44.5 sin (0) \hat{j})[/tex]

[tex]= -44.5 \hat{i}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{E_3}=56.96 cos (90) \hat{i}+ 56.96 sin (90) \hat{j}[/tex]

[tex]= 56.96 \hat{j}[/tex]

And now adding up to find the components of the net electric field vector::

[tex]E_x= -44.5[/tex]

[tex]E_y= 56.96+56.96=113.92[/tex]

The resultant would be 122.30 which is wrong, the right answer is the single number 47 N/C. So why am I not getting the right answer?
 
roam said:
Hi Collinsmark

I tried that, it didn't work:

[tex]\vec{E_1}=56.96 cos (90) \hat{i}+ 56.96 sin (90) \hat{j}[/tex]

[tex]= 56.96 \hat{j}[/tex]

The direction of [itex]\hat r[/itex] is from the charge, to the test point. So the [itex]\hat r[/itex] direction of the top charge is [itex]\hat r = 4/5 \ \hat \imath - 3/5 \ \hat \jmath[/itex]. I'll let you do the rest.
 
So [tex]\hat{r}[/tex] is a unit vector directed from the charge toward P. But I'm a little bit confused... where did you get "4/5" and "-3/5" from? I know that 5 is the hypotenuse (line from the top charge to P), but why did you divide them like that? :confused:
 
roam said:
So [tex]\hat{r}[/tex] is a unit vector directed from the charge toward P. But I'm a little bit confused... where did you get "4/5" and "-3/5" from? I know that 5 is the hypotenuse (line from the top charge to P), but why did you divide them like that? :confused:

Well, putting it somewhat simply, 'sine' is the opposite over hypotenuse. 'Cosine' is the adjacent over hypotenuse. There is a negative sign associated with the [itex]\hat \jmath[/itex] since that component is pointing down.

[tex]\sin \theta = \frac{\mathrm{opposite}}{\mathrm{hypotenuse}}[/tex]

[tex]\cos \theta = \frac{\mathrm{adjacent}}{\mathrm{hypotenuse}}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K