Solve Sign Issues in Elec. Potential, Energy, Force, Field, Work

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the reconciliation of sign conventions in the context of electric potential, potential energy, electric force, electric field, and work, specifically focusing on the potential due to a point charge defined by the equation \(V=\frac{kq}{r}\). The author clarifies the distinction between constant electric fields and point charges, emphasizing the necessity of integration to accurately calculate work done in the latter case. The correct interpretation of electric potential and its relationship to work is established, highlighting the importance of understanding these concepts for effective teaching in physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric potential and potential energy concepts
  • Familiarity with Coulomb's Law and electric fields
  • Knowledge of integration techniques in physics
  • Ability to interpret and apply equations related to work and energy
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric potential from point charges using integration
  • Explore the differences between electric fields generated by point charges and uniform electric fields
  • Learn about the implications of sign conventions in physics problems
  • Review the relationship between work, energy, and electric potential in various contexts
USEFUL FOR

STEM educators, physics teachers, and anyone involved in teaching or learning about electricity and magnetism, particularly those focused on clarifying complex concepts in electric potential and energy.

Ackbach
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,148
Reaction score
94
I had some trouble reconciling signs while attempting to teach electricity to my students here. The topic is electric potential, potential energy, electric force, electric field, and work. After much thought - several hours - I have finally come up with a presentation that solves the issues. Fundamentally, the issue was confusing a constant electric field with a point charge.

The goal of this post is to arrive at the correct sign information for the potential due to a point charge:
$$V=\frac{kq}{r}.$$
Background: suppose a ball rolls down a hill, with a starting height of $y_{i}$ and a stopping height of $y_{f}$. These heights are measured relative to a position of low potential energy. Then the work done on the ball by the gravitational force is given by $$W_{i\to f}=-\Delta U=-(U_{f}-U_{i})=-(mgy_{f}-mgy_{i})=mg(y_{i}-y_{f}).$$
Since $y_{i}>y_{f}$, the work done by the gravitational force on the ball is positive. This makes sense, because, as Young and Freedman say on page 195 of University Physics, 9th Edition, "When the body moves up, $y$ increases, the work done by the gravitational force is negative, and the gravitational potential energy increases ($\Delta U>0$). When the body moves down, $y$ decreases, the gravitational force does positive work, and the gravitational potential energy decreases ($\Delta U<0$)." So far so good.

Moving on to the electrical case. Suppose I have a uniform electric field of field strength $E$ pointed down. This could happen in the middle of a capacitor, e.g. By the definition of the electric field, the lines go away from positive charge, and towards negative charge. Hence, I have positive charges up top (say, on the top plate of a capacitor), and negative charges down below. Now suppose I have a positive test charge $q_{0}$ that is in this field pointed down. Because the test charge is positive, it's going to want to go towards the negative plate, so the electric field will be trying to move the test charge down - with the field. The electric force on the test charge $q_{0}$ is $F=q_{0}E$, a constant. Hence, the work done by the field on the test charge in moving the test charge from $a$ to $b$ is given by
$$W_{a\to b}=\int_{r_{a}}^{r_{b}}F\,dx=Fd=q_{0}Ed,$$
where $d$ is the distance from point $a$ to point $b$, and equals $|r_{a}-r_{b}|$.

If we measure distance $y$ from the negative plate, which is typical, then the potential energy is $U=q_{0}Ey$. The work done by the electric field in moving the test charge from point $a$ to point $b$ is
$$W_{a\to b}=-\Delta U=-(U_{b}-U_{a})=-(q_{0}Ey_{b}-q_{0}Ey_{a})
=q_{0}E(y_{a}-y_{b}).$$
Again, Young and Freedman on page 732:
"When $y_{a}$ is greater than $y_{b}$ ..., the positive test charge $q_{0}$ moves downward, in the same direction as $\overset{\to}{\mathbf{\it{E}}}$; the displacement is in the same direction as the force $\overset{\to}{\mathbf{\it{F}}}=q_{0}\overset{\to}{\mathbf{\it{E}}},$ so the field does positive work and $U$ decreases."

Now we introduce the electric potential $V_{a}$ at a point $a$. This is NOT voltage, but electric potential. We define it to be the potential energy per unit charge: $V_{a}=U_{a}/q_{0}$. Here $U_{a}$ is the potential energy at point $a$ relative to some zero point, and $q_{0}$ is the test charge at point $a$. If we wish to write the work as a function of $V$, we divide through by the test charge to obtain
$$ \frac{W_{a \to b}}{q_{0}}=- \frac{ \Delta U}{q_{0}}=
- \left( \frac{U_{b}}{q_{0}}- \frac{U_{a}}{q_{0}}\right)=
-(V_{b}-V_{a})= V_{a}-V_{b}.$$

Finally, we introduce the concept of voltage, which is a potential difference. That is,
$$V_{ab}:=V_{a}-V_{b},$$
and we say that $V_{ab}$ is the potential of $a$ with respect to $b$. Hence,
$$ \frac{W_{a \to b}}{q_{0}}=V_{ab}.$$

Now we change our physical setup. Up until now, we have considered a constant electric field $E$. Suppose, instead, that we have a single point charge $q$ generating an electric field. The force it exerts on a test charge $q_{0}$ is given by the usual Coulomb's Law formula
$$F_{r}=\frac{kqq_{0}}{r^{2}}.$$
Following the procedure before, we must integrate to find the work done in moving a test charge from point $a$ to point $b$:
$$W_{a \to b}= \int_{r_{a}}^{r_{b}}F_{r} \,dr
=kqq_{0} \int_{r_{a}}^{r_{b}}r^{-2} \,dr
=kqq_{0} \left( \frac{1}{r_{a}}- \frac{1}{r_{b}} \right).$$
Recall that we still have $W=- \Delta U$, and hence it must be that
$$-(U_{b} - U_{a}) = U_{a}-U_{b}=kqq_{0} \left( \frac{1}{r_{a}}- \frac{1}{r_{b}} \right).$$
Hence, it is consistent to write that
$$U_{a}= \frac{kqq_{0}}{r_{a}} \quad \text{and} \quad
U_{b}= \frac{kqq_{0}}{r_{b}}.$$
So, from this, we generalize and claim that the potential energy at a test charge $q_{0}$ that is $r$ away from a charge $q$ is $U=kqq_{0}/r$.

Since the potential is $V=U/q_{0}$, we divide this equation by $q_{0}$ to obtain
$$V= \frac{kq}{r},$$
which was the goal of this exercise.

The incorrect thing to do in the point charge case is to say this:
$$W_{a \to b} = Fd = q_{0} E d,$$
but also
$$W_{a \to b}=- \Delta U=-q_{0}(V_{b}-V_{a}) = -q_{0}V_{ba}.$$
Hence,
$$-q_{0}V_{ba}= q_{0} E d \implies V_{ba}=-Ed=-\frac{kq}{r^{2}}\,d=-\frac{kq}{r}.$$
The problem with this, of course, is that the force is not constant in the point charge case, and hence the equation $W = F d$ doesn't work. You must integrate, which yields the minus sign.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
Greg Bernhardt said:
Thanks @Ackbach, what math forum can we move this to?
STEM Educators and Teachers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
930
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
693
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K