Negative in a Electric Potential Energy/Kinetic Energy Question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a physics problem involving an electron moving away from a fixed positive charge and calculating its maximum velocity. The key point is that the electric potential energy (Ep) of the electron, which is negative due to its charge, is equated to its kinetic energy (Ek) at maximum velocity. The confusion arises from the negative sign in the potential energy, leading to a misunderstanding about whether the sign is important; it is clarified that only the change in energy matters, not the absolute values. The calculated velocity of 3.2 x 10^8 m/s exceeds the speed of light, raising concerns about the problem's formulation. The discussion emphasizes the distinction between electric potential and potential energy, noting that the problem may not be well-constructed without considering relativistic effects.
mistermill
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



My questions reads:

An electron is pulled away from a fixed charge of 1.3μC. The electron is moved from the positive charge to 4.0 cm away from the charge. If the electron is released from the 4.0 c mark, what is the max velocity of the electron?



Homework Equations



Ep = k q1q2/r - electric potential energy

k = 9x10^9
q1 = -1.6 x 10^-19 C
q2 = 1.3 x 10^-6 C
r = 4.0 cm = 0.04 m



Ek = 1/2 mv² - kinetic energy

m = 9.11 x 10^-31 kg
v = ?


The Attempt at a Solution



Ep = Ek because all the electric potential energy is converted to kinetic energy when velocity is at its maximum.

kq1q2/r = 1/2 mv²

Since q1 is the charge of the electron, it is negative, so the left hand side of the equation is negative. That makes taking the square root impossible. But if I ignore the negative, I get the right answer in the text.

Does that mean the sign of the Ep is not important, or that the magnitude (the absolute value) is all that matters?

Or is it because the first equation should be the net energy =0 and the Ep gets moved algebraically and the negative disappears?

The answer I get when I ignore the negative, and the answer given in the text is 3.2 x 10^8 m/s

This is faster than the speed of light, which also confuses me a bit. Maybe just not a well written question?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a case where the distinction between the electric potential function and electric potential energy is important. Many different functions can be used as the electric potential function for the same system, since it is merely a type of antiderivative of the electric field. It is because of this status that it can be used to evaluate the work integral that tells us the total change in energy of the electron when moved between two points in the electric field (the fundamental theorem of calculus). This change in electric potential energy is the quantity you are equating to change in kinetic energy of the electron.
The change in potential energy is positive if we pull the electron away from the proton, and therefore negative if the electron moves in the opposite direction. When the electron is released, since there are no other forces acting on it, the Work-Energy theorem allows us to equate the change in electric potential energy with its change in kinetic energy. But remember it is change that is being equated, not particular values of potential energy or kinetic energy. Therefore, even if you got a negative change in potential energy, this would correspond to a decrease in kinetic energy, not an equation between a particular kinetic energy and a negative value. In symbols, then, your negative change in electric potential is equated to \frac{1}{2}mv_i^2 - \frac{1}{2}mv_f^2 = 0 - \frac{1}{2}mv_f^2 since the electron's initial velocity was 0. This should alleviate your worries about signage.
As for the problem with the speed of light, it is indeed not a prudent type of question, unless the author is going to use it as an example later when they mention special relativity.
 
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