Troubleshooting Electric Field Calculation: Qs, Rs, and N/C

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around troubleshooting an electric field calculation involving two charges, -8.0 µC and +6.0 µC, separated by 4 cm. The original calculation incorrectly applied the formula, particularly neglecting to square the distance for one charge. A correct approach involves using Coulomb's law and the superposition principle to calculate the electric fields produced by each charge separately and then summing them. The key takeaway is to ensure that the distance is squared in the calculations and to apply the principle of superposition correctly. Accurate calculations will yield the correct electric field magnitude and direction.
joej
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
I'm doing the following problem, it seems to me that I am doing all the correct steps but my answer differs from the answer key, am I missing something?

1. What is the magnitude and the direction of the electric field at a point midway in between a -8.0uC and a +6.0uC change 4cm apart.


This is what I'm doing:

E = ( k * (Q1 / r1^2) ) * ( 1 + ( (Q2 / Q1) / (r2^2 / r1^2) ) )

==

(9x10^9 * ( (8 * 10^-6) / ( 2 * 10^-2) ) ) * ( 1 + ( (6 / 8) / (2 / 2) ) )

==

3600000 * 1.75 = 6300000 N/C


now... that is what I'm getting, could somoen please point out to me what I am forgetting to do, if anything.



__________edit

stupidity strikes again... forgot to square r1
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Why write E in such a strange way? (to me anyway)

Use Coulomb's law and the superposition principle.
Calculate the field due to Q1 and the field due to Q2, then add.
 
Hello joej...

The formula for electric field at a point distant r units from a charge Q is:

\vec{E} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}}\frac{Q}{r^2}\hat{e}_{r}

The direction of the field is radial. In your problem you need to compute

\vec{E}_{net} = \vec{E_{1}} + \vec{E_{2}}

the two terms arising due to the electric fields produced (independently--make a note of this, the superposition principle) has been used here) by the two charges. Have you used this fact? :confused:

Cheers
Vivek
 
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