Understanding Electric Potential

AI Thread Summary
Electric potential differs from electric potential energy in that it represents the potential energy per unit charge, indicating the work needed to move a charge from infinity to a point in an electric field. The electric potential is a scalar quantity, meaning it has no direction, but it can be visualized through equipotential surfaces where the potential remains constant. The relationship between electric potential and electric field is expressed mathematically through the integral of the electric field along a path between two points. Understanding these concepts clarifies how electric potential is perceived in space, even in the absence of charges. This foundational knowledge enhances comprehension of electric phenomena in physics.
Jide
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


How is the electric potential different from the electric potential energy of a charge. what is the conceptual meaning of the electric potential.


Homework Equations


U=qV; U= kq1q2/r
r= distance between two charges

The Attempt at a Solution


i clearly understand how these formulas/ equations work. as a matter of fact i have used it to solve about 12 problems in my book (physics for scientist and engineers by Randall Knight.) I'm just eager to know what the electric potential is. i know it is a phenomena that is in an orientation in space and is felt whether or not there is a charge(s) to experience it. i understand the increase in potential when a charge moves opposite the direction of an electric field, but where does it come from?:confused: how did they come up with this epuation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The electric potential is the electric potential energy per unit charge, i.e., the work you must do to bring a unit charge from infinity to some point in space where you feel an electric field.
The electric potential difference between two points A and B is, mathematically:

V_B-V_A=-\int^B_A \vec E \cdot d\vec r

I hope I could help.

PS- Note that the potential is scalar, so has no orientation in space. Nevertheless, you can draw equipotential surfaces, that are regions on space where the potential is the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oh! Thank you so much that really cleared my head. I really understand the concept now. Thanks!
 
I am really glad I could help you. :wink:
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top