Moving Point Charges - Voltage Calculations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the voltage between points A and B due to two positive point charges, addressing how to compute this voltage in different configurations. The potential at a point is derived from each charge's contribution, using Coulomb's constant and the respective distances from the charges to the points of interest. It is clarified that the speed of transition between configurations does not affect the voltage, provided relativistic effects are ignored. Additionally, a current can only exist if there is a conductive path between points A and B. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly identifying distances and charge positions in calculations.
somasimple
Gold Member
Messages
765
Reaction score
5
Hi all,

Here is my problem:

Two positive points charges are situated as the initial figure:
1/ How to compute the voltage between A and B (or C)?

2/ If the final condition is like described in the second figure, what is now the voltage between A and B.
3/ if the transition between the two states takes a time t1, does the speed of this transition changes something about the voltage that exists between A and B?

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • moving_charges_02.jpg
    moving_charges_02.jpg
    16.1 KB · Views: 387
  • moving_charges_58.jpg
    moving_charges_58.jpg
    13 KB · Views: 418
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the potential or voltage due to a single point charge? That would be useful here.
 
BTW, I received a warning/infraction but I'm not an undergrad student.
The question is just outside my level of expertise (health).
 
somasimple said:
Yes, exactly, that is the way to go.
But since there is a space behind charges I suppose the computation a little different?
No, it's really the same computation. Use the distance from the point of interest (either A or B) to each charge.

somasimple said:
BTW, I received a warning/infraction but I'm not an undergrad student.
The question is just outside my level of expertise (health).
Okay, but that is not relevant. Any textbook-style problem, even if it's for your own independent study, is subject to our "homework help" rules. If you haven't already, you can check out our policy by clicking the "Rules" link at the top of this page, and then scroll down to the section titled Homework Help.
 
Redbelly98 said:
Okay, but that is not relevant. Any textbook-style problem, even if it's for your own independent study, is subject to our "homework help" rules. If you haven't already, you can check out our policy by clicking the "Rules" link at the top of this page, and then scroll down to the section titled Homework Help.
I made the subject. I made the images. I put the subject in the right forum (Classics Physics) but the subject was moved by a moderator.
 
If you'd like to continue with working on the problem, I am willing to help.

As a start, I can suggest computing the potential at point B in your first figure.
 
Redbelly98 said:
As a start, I can suggest computing the potential at point B in your first figure.

My shortcut (?)
k = coulomb's constant
d2 = d-r2
VAB=(k*q1/(r1+d2))+(k*q2/(r2+d2))
it takes account of the space behind the charges (?)
 
Ah, no, it doesn't really work that way. For example, the potential at point B due to charge q1 alone would be

k q1 / (distance from q1 to B)

However, I am looking at the figures more closely and some things are confusing me:

1. You have used r2 to refer to the position of q1. Did you mean to mix the subscripts like that? It is confusing to do so, but we can go with that definition if that is what you intend.

2. Do "A" and "B" refer to points along the line joining the charges? It would make sense if they do, but then point "C" would be the same as point "B" in your first figure.
 
  • #10
there is an error in the figure. r1 was meant to belong to q1.
and r2 to q2.
 
  • #11
Redbelly98 said:
2. Do "A" and "B" refer to points along the line joining the charges? It would make sense if they do, but then point "C" would be the same as point "B" in your first figure.
Yes.
 
  • #12
Okay, thanks.

So, if you just had charge q1, the potential at B would be
k q1 / r1
But you also need to add the potential due to charge q2, so you'd have
VB = (k q1 / r1) + ____​

Then you'd do the same thing for VA, the potential at point A.
 
  • #13
VB = (k q1 / r1) + (k q2 / r2)
VA = (k q1 /(d-r1)) + (k q2 /(d- r2)) ?
 
  • #14
Yes, that's right.

And the voltage between A & B would be VA-VB ... or VB-VA, depending on whether A or B is being used as the reference point.

EDIT:
Your question #2 works the same way.
#3: As long as we are ignoring relativistic effects, then no, the speed of the transition does not affect the potential.
 
  • #15
Redbelly98 said:
#3: As long as we are ignoring relativistic effects, then no, the speed of the transition does not affect the potential.
Does it affect the electric current?
 
  • #16
What current?
 
  • #17
I thought there was a current since there is a voltage but and I'm certainly wrong.
 
  • #18
I made new pictures:
Hope they are more accurate.
 

Attachments

  • moving_charges_02.jpg
    moving_charges_02.jpg
    17.2 KB · Views: 402
  • moving_charges_58.jpg
    moving_charges_58.jpg
    14.8 KB · Views: 399
  • #19
somasimple said:
I thought there was a current since there is a voltage but and I'm certainly wrong.
There would have to be some type of conductor joining A and B for there to be a current.
somasimple said:
I made new pictures:
Hope they are more accurate.
Looks good, that more accurately depicts the situation you are describing.
 
  • #20
Redbelly98 said:
There would have to be some type of conductor joining A and B for there to be a current.
That is what I learned some time ago. A current may exist only if there is an electric circuit.

Redbelly98 said:
Looks good, that more accurately depicts the situation you are describing.
Thanks.
 
Back
Top