Understanding the Work-Energy Theorem for an Electron in a Circular Orbit

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaymo3141
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exam
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the work-energy theorem as it applies to an electron in a circular orbit, focusing on the forces acting on the electron and the proton. The force required to maintain the electron's orbit is derived from the equation F = mv^2/r, with the Coulomb's law providing the necessary force. Participants debate the significance of the proton's motion and mass, questioning whether its kinetic energy should be considered in the analysis. The angle between the force and displacement is consistently 90 degrees, leading to the conclusion that no work is done on the electron since its kinetic energy remains constant. The conversation emphasizes the need to justify assumptions about the system's dynamics and energy conservation.
Jaymo3141
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



(see attached)

Homework Equations



F=mv^2/r, Integral(F<dot>dl)

The Attempt at a Solution



the answer is B. Can anyone explain why?
 

Attachments

  • physics question.jpg
    physics question.jpg
    32.9 KB · Views: 450
Physics news on Phys.org
Your F= mv^2/R is the force required to keep the elctron in its circular orbit. What generates that required force?

Hint #2: proton mass is >> electron mass so the proton effectively has very little v. But it has a huge m. Can we neglect the v of the proton in this problem, and if so, why?
 
well, I know that the force causing mv^2/r is kqq/r^2 coulombs law. And the proton is stationary so all the kenetic energy is from the electron. and I'm thinking that the energy of the electron can be calculated using work somehow since it is moving and there is a force on it. but the angle between the force and displacement is always 90, so Fdcos(theta) would always be 0.
 
Why don't you just equate the two forces & see what happens?

You're not exactly right when you say that the proton remains stationary. It also moves, and it has lots of mass so maybe Mv^2/2 of the proton is significant? You're right, it isn't, I just think you should be able to justify your assumption.
 
Jaymo3141 said:
well, I'm thinking that the energy of the electron can be calculated using work somehow since it is moving and there is a force on it. but the angle between the force and displacement is always 90, so Fdcos(theta) would always be 0.

Since the k.e. ( 1/2 mv^2) of the electron is not changing, how can there be work done on it continuously? Its potential energy is not changing, and the work done would have to increase one or the other, right? So yes, the angle between the force and the displacement is always 90 deg.
 
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 .
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...
Back
Top