Two expressions for work - which is correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Niles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expressions Work
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the calculation of work done in a system with two point charges, q and -q, separated by a distance of 2d. Two approaches to calculate the work yield different results: W = -K*q²/(4d) and W = -K*q²/(2d). The discrepancy arises from the incorrect substitution of distances in the electric field calculations. The correct method involves integrating the electric field before substituting limits, which resolves the inconsistency in the results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric fields and potential energy in electrostatics
  • Familiarity with integration techniques in physics
  • Knowledge of Coulomb's law and its application
  • Ability to manipulate mathematical expressions involving limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of electric potential energy in electrostatic systems
  • Learn about the principles of integrating electric fields over distances
  • Explore the implications of Coulomb's law in multi-charge systems
  • Investigate common pitfalls in calculating work done in electrostatics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on electrostatics, electrical engineering, and anyone involved in solving problems related to electric fields and potential energy.

Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0
When I want to find the energy in a system containing two points charges q and -q, I can use the following formula:

W = -Q\int_{\bf{a}}^{\bf{b}} {\bf{E}} \cdot d{\bf{l}} = Q(V(\mb b) - V(\mb a))

If my reference point is set to infinity, I can rewrite the last expression to:

W=QV(\mb r)

The two point charges are separated by a distance of 2d, so the energy in the system calculated from the first formula will be (when bringing in the charge q in from infinity):

W = -K*q^2/(4d).

If I use the last expression, I get

W = -K*q^2/(2d).

Ehh, as far as I can see, I haven't made an obvious mistake. So how can this be?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Niles said:
The two point charges are separated by a distance of 2d, so the energy in the system calculated from the first formula will be (when bringing in the charge q in from infinity):

W = -K*q^2/(4d).
Why is this 4d of the charges are separated by a distance of 2d?
 
The electric field at the point x=d is E = -K*q/(4d^2).

This I integrate, and it still gives me 4d.
 
Niles said:
The electric field at the point x=d is E = -K*q/(4d^2).

This I integrate, and it still gives me 4d.
Let's step back a bit. Suppose our first charge is located at the origin, simply because it ismore conveinient. The the electric field due to this point charge is,

\mathbf{E} = k\frac{q}{R^2}\hat{\mathbf{r}}

Where R is the distance from the origin and \hat{\mathbf{r}} is the radial unit vector. Agree?

Now let's bring in the second charge,

W = -Q\int^{2r}_{\infty}\mathbf{E}\cdot{d\mathbf{\ell}}

Now setting Q = -q and integrating along the (negative) radial direction,

W = qk\int^{2r}_{\infty}\frac{dR}{R^2}\left(-\hat{\mathbf{r}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{r}}\right)

W = -qk\int^{2r}_{\infty}\frac{dR}{R^2}

Do you agree?
 
Yes, I do agree.
 
Niles said:
Yes, I do agree.
Hence integrating,

W = qk\left[\frac{1}{R}\right]^{2r}_{\infty}

W = qk\left(\frac{1}{2r}-\lim_{R\to\infty}\frac{1}{R}\right)

W = \frac{kq}{2r}
 
I agree with what you have done, but I also still agree on what I have done. What is wrong with my method?
 
Niles said:
I agree with what you have done, but I also still agree on what I have done. What is wrong with my method?
In your method, where have you placed your initial charge?
 
I have my initial charge in x=-d and the other is brought in from infinity to x=d.
 
  • #10
Niles said:
The electric field at the point x=d is E = -K*q/(4d^2).

This I integrate, and it still gives me 4d.
Simply integrating this will not give you the potential energy at this point, you need to integrate before you substitute the limits in.
 
  • #11
Ok, this is how I've done:

We have that \[<br /> W = - Q\int_\infty ^d {Edl = QV(d)} <br /> \]<br />

Approach 1, where \[<br /> E = \frac{{ - kq}}{{\left( {2d&#039;} \right)^2 }}<br /> \]<br />:

\[<br /> W = - q\int_\infty ^d {\frac{{ - kq}}{{\left( {2d&#039;} \right)^2 }}dd&#039; = } \frac{{ - kq^2 }}{{4d}}<br /> \]<br />

Approach 2, where \[<br /> V(d) = \frac{{ - kq}}{{2d}}<br /> \]<br />:

\[<br /> W = q \cdot \frac{{ - kq}}{{2d}} = \frac{{ - kq^2 }}{{2d}}<br /> \]<br />

Can you point out the mistake here?
 
  • #12
Sorry Niles, I have no idea what your doing with you're first approach.
 
  • #13
Don't be sorry, sadly I do not explain things very well to others.

I found my error now. Instead of using an arbitrary distance in the electric field, I just inserted 2d, which is of course wrong, since I have to integrate it. This is of course also what you wrote in #10.

You did it again.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K