1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Variation statement into graphs- Right?

  1. Jul 29, 2011 #1

    xNick94

    User Avatar

    My first post, yay i already like the atmosphere here :P anyway....

    Using the formula F = kQq/R2 sketch graphs between
    a. F and Q (k,q, and R are constant)

    b. F and R (Q,q and k are constant)

    c. Q and R (k,q and F are constant)


    I think i did it correctly but I'm not quite sure.

    a) I wrote that F is directly proportional to Q so i guess its Direct Variation graph.

    b) Is 1 / R^2 inversely proportional? And is the graph the same as y= 1/x or should it be y=SQUAREROOT of 1/x but then it wouldn't make sense?

    c) i got it so that it's R = SQUAREROOT of Q so it's direct root graph?

    I hope that's correct! Can anybody double check?

    ----------------
     
    xNick94, Jul 29, 2011
  2. jcsd
    Phys.org - latest science and technology news stories on Phys.org
  3. Jul 29, 2011 #2

    PeterO

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper


    Your (a) sounds good

    In (b) you said it was 1 / R^2, then immediately inversely proportional. What happened to the square?

    (c) is a true statement, but why express R in terms of Q, when the question said Q in terms of R ?
     
    PeterO, Jul 29, 2011
  4. Jul 29, 2011 #3

    xNick94

    User Avatar

    Thanks for your reply,
    I suspected it could be Square.root 1/R.

    and does it really make a difference if you express it in the other way?
     
    xNick94, Jul 29, 2011
  5. Jul 29, 2011 #4

    PeterO

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I have not seen many people claim the radius of a circle varies as the square root of the Area when asked to draw a graph showing the relationship between the Area and radius of a circle.

    The test of whether it makes any difference would be when you change the variables you graph to get a straight line so that you can determine the complete relationship.

    And I don't think the second one is Square.root 1/R. The way you are writing them, it could be Square.root 1/F
     
    PeterO, Jul 29, 2011
  6. Jul 30, 2011 #5

    xNick94

    User Avatar

    I'm really confused :( I'm trying to understand it but i'm having trouble grasping the concept - F is proportional to R^2 since the R^2 came from F=kQq/R^2. So why doesn't that make it an inversely proportional graph or what is it even supposed to be- this is really frustrating :(
     
    xNick94, Jul 30, 2011
  7. Jul 30, 2011 #6

    PeterO

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper


    F is proportional to 1 / R^2 - but I think you just mis-wrote it.

    if you were to graph y = 1/x you would get a graph showing inverse proportion.

    But there is also y = 1/x^2 - the inverse square, y = 1/x^3 , the inverse cube etc.
     
    PeterO, Jul 30, 2011
  8. Jul 30, 2011 #7

    xNick94

    User Avatar

    Alright that makes sense, thanks for all your help!
     
    xNick94, Jul 30, 2011
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Variation statement into graphs- Right?

  1. Did i do this right? distance vs time graph question (Replies: 1)

  2. Is this right? velocity vs time graph ? (Replies: 3)

  3. Is this right? (Replies: 1)

  4. Is this right? (Replies: 2)

  5. Proprtionality Statement Graphing Procedures (Replies: 2)

Loading...