Voltage vs Potential Energy Formulas

5 replies · 10K views · last reply
[V]
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I am having a hard time figuring out the signs for some of these formulas:

First of all, U=Potential Energy
[tex]V=\frac{U}{q}[/tex]
[tex]\int F dr = \int Eq dr = - Work[/tex]
Since,
[tex]Work=K=-U[/tex]
Therefore
[tex]\int Eq dr=+U[/tex]
[tex]U=\frac{QqK}{r}[/tex]

Therefore,
[tex]V=\frac{KQ}{r}[/tex]

BOTH U & V have a positive slope of 1/r.

So far, everything checks out. But when I want to find the ΔV across a distance of a parallel plate capacitor, something seems to break down...

[tex]\int E dr = V[/tex]
Since E is constant here:
[tex]E\int dr = V[/tex]
I take the derivative WRT to 'r'
[tex]E=\frac{dv}{dr}[/tex]
[tex]dV=E * dr[/tex]

What is the potential difference between 20cm and 40cm in the uniform 3000 (V/m) electric field?

The answer is -600V. I don't fully understand why it is negative!

The equation I just drived, ΔV=EΔr gives me a positive value!
How do you justify this negative number in the end? Please explain with calculus terminology if possible.

Are all my assumptions up until this point correct?
 
Hi [V]! :smile:

You've lost a minus …

U = -Qqk/r (= ∫-∞r Qqk/x2 dx) :wink:​
 
Ahh! Cant be!
[tex]\int_i^f F dr = (-\frac{KQq}{r_{f}})-(-\frac{KQq}{r_{fi}})[/tex]

[tex]W=-(\frac{KQq}{r_{f}}-\frac{KQq}{r_{fi}})[/tex]

[tex]\Delta U=-W[/tex]

[tex]\Delta U=\frac{KQq}{r_{f}}-\frac{KQq}{r_{fi}}[/tex]

[tex]U=\frac{KQq}{r}[/tex]

Correct?
 
Hi [V]! :smile:

Sorry, you're right, I was getting confused with gravitational potential. :redface:

The error was in your equation …
[V];3199483 said:
[tex]\int E dr = V[/tex]

… potential energy = minus work done by a conservative force

electric potential = minus work done per charge

so V = -∫ E dr :wink:​
 
Thank you! :)

Soo
[tex]V = -\int E dr[/tex]

If I derive both sides, I get

[tex]\frac{dV}{dr}=-E[/tex]

[tex]E=\frac{-\Delta V}{\Delta r}[/tex]

With this equation, my other problem seems to work.
However, now this presents another problem!

Using this relation, I want to find the Capacitance of a parallel plate capacitor.

Given that

[tex]E=\frac{Q}{\epsilon_0A}[/tex]

And

[tex]C=\frac{Q}{\Delta V}[/tex]

Therefore, using the relation I just proved in the previous stepped:

[tex]\frac{-\Delta V}{\Delta r} = \frac{Q}{\epsilon_0A}[/tex]

Solve for Q

[tex]Q=-\frac{\epsilon_0A\Delta V}{\Delta r}[/tex]

[tex]C=\frac{Q}{\Delta V}=-\frac{\epsilon_0A}{\Delta r}[/tex]

then just replace variables to match my literature...

[tex]C=-\frac{\epsilon_0A}{d}[/tex]

But Waiit!

My textbook says it is positive!
They seem to be using this relationship to derive this equation:

[tex]E=\frac{\Delta V}{d}[/tex]

They use different variables, but why is it positive? I thought I just proved earlier that it should be :

[tex]E=-\frac{\Delta V}{d}[/tex]
 
hi [V]! :smile:
[V];3200429 said:
Using this relation, I want to find the Capacitance of a parallel plate capacitor …

let's measure all displacements from the -ve to the +ve plate …

then D and E are negative, D = -Q/A, E = -Q/ε0A …

the potential difference from the -ve to the +ve plate is V = -∫ E.dx = ∫ Q/ε0A dx = xQ/ε0A

(to put it in more general terms, E goes from +ve to -ve, so the work done from the -ve to the +ve plate must be negative, and the potential difference must be positive)