Point charges and electric potential

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the equation for electrical potential energy, Wp = q * E * r, particularly in the context of point charges. It highlights the confusion regarding the variable electric field strength as the distance between charges changes, questioning why a simplified equation is provided when the actual calculation involves more complexity. The explanation clarifies that the equation applies under the assumption of a constant electric field, which is not the case for point charges, necessitating calculus to integrate the changing field. It emphasizes that to accurately calculate work done in varying electric fields, one must break the field into small, constant segments and integrate. Ultimately, mastering calculus is essential for tackling these physics concepts effectively.
fawk3s
Messages
341
Reaction score
1
I have some difficulties grasping the idea of this equation

Wp = q * E * r

Where
Wp - electrical potential energy
q - charge
E - the strength of the electric field
r - radius, or distance from the other point charge

So basically, say we have 2 point charges. One positive, and one negative, so they attract.
But I can't imagine how the work done by the moving point charge is the same we get by calculating by that formula. Because the closer the point charge gets to the other point charge, the bigger the E gets. So the electric force applied on that point charge isn't constant. Its getting bigger.
My physics textbook also says that the way to calculate the work done by the point charge in this situation is too difficult to describe in a high school textbook. But yet they still give me that equation. Why?

I can imagine the same thing with Earth and its gravitational potential energy, but the change in g (9,81 m/s2) is so small over short distances that there's no point to really observe it.

Or am I getting this whole thing wrong? Please help !
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
fawk3s said:
I have some difficulties grasping the idea of this equation

Wp = q * E * r

Where
Wp - electrical potential energy
q - charge
E - the strength of the electric field
r - radius, or distance from the other point charge



Im going to assume you know calculus ( if not, integration is the continuous summing of a variable)

The potential energy is the same as the work done to bring the particle to that point from an infinite distance ( ie a distance where the potential energy is 0 )

The electric field E is the force acting on 1 C of charge (sign sensitive ) so q*E gives the force acting on the charged particle.

The work done by this force is given by the intergral of F.dr ( the component of the force in the direction of displacement times the displacement )

Now the equation q*E*r is the case in which F ( ie the electric field E ) is constant over the distance r ( which can be approximately true in some cases though not for point charges )

then the integral becomes F*r = q*E*r

To obtain the work done for 2 point charges we have to integrate E and r which will get complicated as you apply the by-parts integration ( both E and r are functions of r )

hope this helps
 
Yes, I understand how the equation works in a homogeneous electric field, and they actually gave us Wp = q * E * d for a homogeneous electric field in the textbook, but Wp = q * E * r for point charges. I don't quite understand what to do with the latter since I have no idea how to use it with a changing E. They are basically the same though.
 
thats what calculus is for.
if you want to do physics then you MUST learn calculus.

conceptually you break the changing field into infinitesimal unchanging parts.
Calculate the energy in each part.
Then add them all up (integrate them)

the integral of an inverse square law will give you an inverse first power law
therefore the energy of an infinitesimal charge falling from infinity
into a finite (unmoving) charge will be proportional to 1/d
where d is the distance from the finite charge.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top