Potential Gradient [Question(s) regarding the concept]

Antonius
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
[Note from mentor: This was originally posted in a non-homework forum so it doesn't have the homework template.]

-----------------------------------------

Problem:
The surface of a solid metal sphere (radius r = 4.58 cm) is at potential V = 9,851 Volts. Find the magnitude of the potential gradient at distance 9.21r from the center of the sphere (outside the sphere), in V/m.
Assume: V(∞) = 0.


My point: I have this general understanding that the Potential Gradient equals to ## \frac { \Delta V } { \Delta x } ## where - ## x ## - is the distance between the charge ## Q ## and the point (or another charge.)

My question: Well in this problem, I am given ## V ## being 9851 Volts but that's on one side.
I watched an educational (physics) video saying that if there is only one charge and no other charges, then the Electric Potential Energy equals to ## zero. ## (which makes the Potential (at distance 9.21 * r = 0 V) That's being said, should I just divide the given ## V ## by the ## distance - x - ## which is also given. [ ## 9.21 * r ## ]?

Please help me with the concept. If you have a link to an online file that could explain this topic in depth please share it. I really want to learn but what I learned from my textbook is not leading me to find answers to problems I am encountering...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Antonius
DEvens said:
what the potential is at a radius from a particular charge
So I did this: $$ V = \frac {kq} {r}; 9851 Volts = \frac { 8.9 * 10^9 * q } { 0.0458 m } ; Hence, q = 5.069 C $$
Now since I know the ## q ## I decided to find ## V ## at ## 9.1 r ##.
To do so I followed these steps: $$ V = \frac { 8.9 * 10^9 * 5.069 } { 9.1 * 0.0458 } = 1.08 * 10^11 V $$
My question: Why is that the given Potential is smaller than the potential at ## 9.1 * r ## ?
Shouldn't it be smaller since ## V = \frac { U } { q } ## and ## U = \frac {k q} { r } ## ? :/
 
Last edited:
Antonius said:
9851Volts=8.9∗109∗q0.0458m;Hence,q=5.069C


Double-check your arithmetic in this step.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Antonius
jtbell said:
Double-check your arithmetic in this step.
Apparently, I forgot to put a parenthesis while dividing by 8.9e9. jtbell, thank you!

So, q = 5.07e-7
Hence, ## \frac {\Delta V} {\Delta r} = -2.36e4 V/m ##

I am hoping this answer is correct.
 
Your q is still off by a factor of 10. Check the decimal points in your input numbers. I used the numbers in the first equation of post #3.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Antonius
jtbell said:
Your q is still off by a factor of 10. Check the decimal points in your input numbers. I used the numbers in the first equation of post #3.
jtbell said:
Your q is still off by a factor of 10. Check the decimal points in your input numbers. I used the numbers in the first equation of post #3.
Yes, I see. I wrote -7, instead of -8. The final answer that I have gotten is calculated with 5.069*10^(-8). Thank you!
 
Now for the second part (the gradient), how did you calculate that number, exactly? It's off by (approximately, not exactly) a factor of 10 also.
 
jtbell said:
Now for the second part (the gradient), how did you calculate that number, exactly? It's off by (approximately, not exactly) a factor of 10 also.
Hmm. What's going on lol.

Okay, let me work on it again.
so if q = 5.069 e -8

Now I need to find V at distance 9.1*r (away from center of sphere)
So V = kq/9.1*r = k*5.069 e -8 / (9.1*0.0458) = 1082.44 Volts

Potential Gradient = delta V / delta x = (1082.44 V - 9851 V) / (9.1*r - r) | 9.1*r - r = r ( 9.1 - 1) = 8.1*r

PG = - 23636.196 V/m = -2.36 e 4 V/m

Am I still wrong?
 
  • #10
I would call that the "average gradient" between the two r's. It's analogous to average velocity = (x2 - x1) / (t2 - t1).

The problem asks for the gradient at the second value of r (9.1r). This is analogous to the instantaneous velocity v = dx/dt. As DEvens noted in post #2, "gradient" here means "derivative with respect to r".
 
  • #11
jtbell said:
I would call that the "average gradient" between the two r's. It's analogous to average velocity = (x2 - x1) / (t2 - t1).

The problem asks for the gradient at the second value of r (9.1r). This is analogous to the instantaneous velocity v = dx/dt. As DEvens noted in post #2, "gradient" here means "derivative with respect to r".

If ## V (at 9.1r) = \frac {kq} {9.1*r} ## then ## \frac {dV} {dr} = \frac {kq} {9.1} *(\frac {-1} {r^2}) ## here ## q = \frac {V_r * r} {k} ## which I plugged into the equation and got ## \frac {dV} {dr} = \frac { -V_r} {9.1*r} ## which makes ## \frac {dV} {dr} = -23635.97 = -2.36e10^4 ##

What's wrong..
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Take the derivative before substituting 9.1r (0.4168m) for r. This gives you an equation for the gradient at any r (provided that it's ≥ the radius of the sphere). Then substitute your desired value of r.
 
  • #13
jtbell said:
Take the derivative before substituting 9.1r (0.4168m) for r.
I did it before subbing a number for r though? And r is not 0.4168 m it's 0.0458 m ( in the question it says its r = 4.58 cm )
 
  • #14
When you take the derivative, you need to use an equation with a "generic" r, that can have any value. Your problem statement is confusing because it uses r and 9.1r to refer to "specific" values of r. I would have written it more carefully by calling the radius of the sphere r1 and the other radius r2 = 9.1r1.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Antonius
  • #15
jtbell said:
When you take the derivative, you need to use an equation with a "generic" r, that can have any value. Your problem statement is confusing because it uses r and 9.1r to refer to "specific" values of r. I would have written it more carefully by calling the radius of the sphere r1 and the other radius r2 = 9.1r1.
I got -2.15e5.

Is this what you also got?
 
Last edited:
  • #16
That's it. :biggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Antonius
  • #17
How did you guys get this result because I did it over and over with the values provided and I got something else. Here's a summary of the values used according to my calculations:

ro=0.0458 m
r=9.1r0= 0.41678 m
Q=5.02*10-8 C → from Vsurface
dV/dr=-kq/r2 V/m

⇒dV/dr= (8.99*109) N*m2/C2 * (5.02*10-8) C / (0.41678)2 m2

⇒dV/dr=-2597.36≅-2.60*103 V/m

 
  • #18
Alan I said:
How did you guys get this result because I did it over and over with the values provided and I got something else. Here's a summary of the values used according to my calculations:

ro=0.0458 m
r=9.1r0= 0.41678 m
Q=5.02*10-8 C → from Vsurface
dV/dr=-kq/r2 V/m

⇒dV/dr= (8.99*109) N*m2/C2 * (5.02*10-8) C / (0.41678)2 m2

⇒dV/dr=-2597.36≅-2.60*103 V/m

There is a vague step which I did not fully understand at first due to weak math background.

Use "the definition of derivative" and it will be much clear and you will most likely get a correct result
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
910
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K