Regarding the Electric Potential Formula

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the electric potential formula, specifically its dependence on the source charge and the implications of having a large secondary charge at a distance. Participants explore how the formula accounts for only the source charge and question the relevance of this in practical problem-solving scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the independence of electric potential from the size of the secondary charge and its usefulness in determining changes in electrical potential energy. They draw parallels with gravitational potential and discuss the implications of setting reference points for potential energy.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants offering insights into the nature of electric potential and its application. Some have provided analogies to gravitational potential, while others are still seeking clarity on how these concepts apply to problem-solving.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the definition of electric potential as energy per charge and the implications of using a test charge that is small compared to the source charge. The conversation also touches on the concept of reference points in potential energy calculations.

needingtoknow
Messages
160
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The formula for Electric Potential as I have it is: "Let Q be a point source charge. At any point P that's a distance r from Q, we say that the electric potential at P is the scalar given by this formula:

electric potential = k * (Q/r)

My question is what if at some distance r from Q, the charge is very large. Wouldn't that then affect the electric potential. In other words how can this electric potential formula not take into account both charges and only takes into account Q which is the source charge?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's just because elecitric potential is "energy per charge" and so is independent of the size of the charge (although the energy and force will vary at that same distance depending on the charge)

It's very much like "gravitational potential" (not to be confused with "gravitational potential energy") which is independent of the mass of the object simply because it's defined as "energy per mass"
 
So if it is independent of the size of the charge then how it is useful in solving problems to determine the change in electrical potential energy?
 
Actually I am recalling from gravitation potential energy that you will get different values for PE depending on where you set PEgrav = 0 at. But if you try to find the change in gravitational potential energy that will be the same no matter where you set PEgrav = 0 at. Does the same idea apply here in the sense that if you find the change in gravitational potential energy it doesn't matter what you set as Q, the source charge or what q, the secondary charge is?
 
needingtoknow said:
So if it is independent of the size of the charge then how it is useful in solving problems to determine the change in electrical potential energy?

I'm probably not the best person to give a good example. But to me this seems like asking, "why is it useful to say 'g=9.8' for solving problems if that doesn't give the force on an object?"

It's more for when you are interested in a certain position, irrespective of the charge (or mass) in it.
(I'm sorry :smile: I'm sure there are much better explanations)

needingtoknow said:
But if you try to find the change in gravitational potential energy that will be the same no matter where you set PEgrav = 0 at.

This is only because when you find the "change" in gravitational potential energy, a final and initial position are implied. So you could pick any random PE=0 position, but it will always reduce to the "final position" becoming the PE=0 position
(simply because the PE that they have in common (relative to your PE=0 position) is irrelevant, and "cancels out")
 
The point charge is supposed to be a "test charge" that is very small compared to Q.

Chet
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
865
Replies
2
Views
703
Replies
4
Views
971
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
918
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K