Where to place Q so it experiences zero net Force.

In summary: I get stuck on a problem that is supposed to be easy because I don't know how to manipulate the algebra properly. I am so sick of it. I have considered going to a math tutor but I know it will just be a waste of time and money because I have been to a math tutor before and he was stumped on several of my questions. I just do not understand, in this problem for example, where the 2 comes from in the first term. I know it has to do with the 2q and the 2x, but what is the exact relationship there? Where does the 2 come from?Chet2 The original equation wasF = (k)(2q)(q
  • #1
RyanBruceX
14
0

Homework Statement


[/B]
A charge of +2q (a) is placed at the origin and a second charge of -q (b) is placed at x = 3.0 cm. Where can a third charge +Q (c) be placed so that it experiences a zero net force?

Homework Equations


F = k(Q1)(Q2)/r^2
E = kQ/r^2
Quadratic?

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
After many attempts from varying angles I think I have it down to Fac + Fbc = 0

So: Fc = k(2q)(q)/(0.003 + x)^2 + k(-q)(q)/x^2 = 0

I can get this down to (k)(2q) + (k)(-q) = 0.003x + x^2, I assume to solve this problem I will need to use the quadratic equation (PLEASE if there is an easier way enlighten me) but for the life of me cannot figure out how to get these figures into the Ax^2 + bx + c format because there are two unknown variables (q and x). I assume because the qs are just factors of each other I probably do not need to actually know the value of q to solve for x. I am so lost... Am I even on the right path?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
RyanBruceX said:

Homework Statement


[/B]
A charge of +2q (a) is placed at the origin and a second charge of -q (b) is placed at x = 3.0 cm. Where can a third charge +Q (c) be placed so that it experiences a zero net force?

Homework Equations


F = k(Q1)(Q2)/r^2
E = kQ/r^2
Quadratic?

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
After many attempts from varying angles I think I have it down to Fac + Fbc = 0

So: Fc = k(2q)(q)/(0.003 + x)^2 + k(-q)(q)/x^2 = 0

I can get this down to (k)(2q) + (k)(-q) = 0.003x + x^2, I assume to solve this problem I will need to use the quadratic equation (PLEASE if there is an easier way enlighten me) but for the life of me cannot figure out how to get these figures into the Ax^2 + bx + c format because there are two unknown variables (q and x). I assume because the qs are just factors of each other I probably do not need to actually know the value of q to solve for x. I am so lost... Am I even on the right path?

You are basically on the right path, but a couple things may help you.

(First, 3cm is not equal to 0.003m -- be sure to fix that before doing any calculations)

Second, it helps me to figure out the basic answer intuitively before writing the equations. Where do you think the positive test charge will end up being placed when it feels zero net force? Think about the forces that you get from the + and - stationary charges. What will the forces be on the positive test charge? Where will it feel zero net force?

So once you know about where it will be, then you can more intuitively write out the sum of the 2 force equations = 0. You are correct that you do not need the absolute value of the charges for this problem when you know the relative amounts...
 
  • #3
Intuitively I can expect the charge would have to be placed to the right of the -q charge. Far enough to the right that the force (due to inverse square of the distance from the 2q charge) will be equal and opposite to the force of the -q charge, with the +2q charge exacting a force in the +x direction and the -q charge exacting an equal but opposite force (-x). Conceptually I think I understand the problem, I feel that I am making it sloppier than it has to be by getting into qudratics though... Is this the only approach to this problem and I just need some remedial math work to get me into the proper form for using the quadratic equation? IE get me from (k)(2q) + (k)(-q) = 0.03x + x^2 to ax^2 + bx + c = 0. Thank you!
 
  • #4
Your expectation for the position is right, and the approach is correct as well. Solving the quadratic equation is easier than you might expect.

RyanBruceX said:
I can get this down to (k)(2q) + (k)(-q) = 0.003x + x^2
Check the previous steps. k and q should not appear here. You can directly get rid of them in the initial "=0" equation.
 
  • #5
Thank you. So I put k(2q)(Q)/(0.03 + x)^2 = - k(-q)(Q)/x2. This allowed elimination of Q and k. I then worked it to (2q)(X^2)/-q = (0.03 + x)^2 to eliminate q resulting in -2x^2 = -(0.03 + x)^2. After factoring the negative through the brackets and using FOIL I come up with the quadratic 3x^2 + 0.06x + 0.0009. Which is incorrect (provides a negative number to be squared)! What did I do something wrong?
 
  • #6
Trying with Latex help...

[tex]\frac{2kqQ}{x^2} - \frac{kqQ}{(x-0.03)^2} = 0[/tex]

[tex]\frac{2}{x^2} - \frac{1}{(x-0.03)^2} = 0[/tex]

[tex]2(x-0.03)^2 - x^2 = 0[/tex]

[tex]2(x^2 -2(0.03x) + 0.0009) - x^2 = 0[/tex]

[tex]x^2 - 0.12x + 0.0018 = 0[/tex]

Do you see the small differences between my last equation and yours? Looks to be a simple algebra error (assuming my math is okay). Does my equation give you a reasonable answer?EDIT -- I fixed my 2nd term just now to 0.12x from 0.06x
EDIT2 -- and fixed my 3rd term to 0.0018 from 0.0009. Duh
 
Last edited:
  • #7
berkeman said:
[tex]2(x-0.03)^2 - x^2 = 0[/tex]
At this point, I would move the x2 to the other side of the equation, and take the square root of both sides.

Chet
 
  • Like
Likes RyanBruceX
  • #8
berkeman said:
2kqQ/x^2 - kqQ/(0.03 - x)^2 = 0.

I just can't understand how this reflects the =0 equation. Isn't the 2kqQ over (0.03 + x)^2 because the 2q acts on Q from the distance 0.03 + x? If you somehow rearranged 2kqQ/(0.03 + x)^2 - kqQ/x^2 = 0 to 2kqQ/x^2 - kqQ/(0.03 - x)^2 = 0 can you please explain how you did it and why you felt the need? I know this stuff is so basic, and 90% of the time my math skills are sufficient for solving the problems, but every once in awhile I run into one where my math foundation clearly isn't up to par. After physics I will be taking math haha...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
Chestermiller said:
At this point, I would move the x2 to the other side of the equation, and take the square root of both sides.

Chet

This step will make it easier for me if I ever get there! Thank you.
 
  • #10
berkeman said:
Trying with Latex help...

[tex]\frac{2kqQ}{x^2} - \frac{kqQ}{(x-0.03)^2} = 0[/tex]

[tex]\frac{2}{x^2} - \frac{1}{(x-0.03)^2} = 0[/tex]

[tex]2(x-0.03)^2 - x^2 = 0[/tex]

[tex]2(x^2 -2(0.03x) + 0.0009) - x^2 = 0[/tex]

[tex]x^2 - 0.12x + 0.0018 = 0[/tex]

Do you see the small differences between my last equation and yours? Looks to be a simple algebra error (assuming my math is okay). Does my equation give you a reasonable answer?EDIT -- I fixed my 2nd term just now to 0.12x from 0.06x
EDIT2 -- and fixed my 3rd term to 0.0018 from 0.0009. Duh

You calculations reveal x = 0.1024 m which when using your formula provides F = 190.8 N +/- x direction. Now if only I could understand why... Thanks for your help! It is very appreciated.
 
  • #11
RyanBruceX said:
You calculations reveal x = 0.1024 m which when using your formula provides F = 190.8 N +/- x direction. Now if only I could understand why... Thanks for your help! It is very appreciated.

I think I got two real solutions when I used the quadratic formula to solve for x (but I've tossed the Post-It notes where I did the calc). I do seem to recall one of the solutions being the one you list. Did you not get a 2nd real solution?
 
  • #12
berkeman said:
I think I got two real solutions when I used the quadratic formula to solve for x (but I've tossed the Post-It notes where I did the calc). I do seem to recall one of the solutions being the one you list. Did you not get a 2nd real solution?

I think one was the answer I gave and one was a negative number so I dismissed it.

RyanBruceX said:
I just can't understand how this reflects the =0 equation. Isn't the 2kqQ over (0.03 + x)^2 because the 2q acts on Q from the distance 0.03 + x? If you somehow rearranged 2kqQ/(0.03 + x)^2 - kqQ/x^2 = 0 to 2kqQ/x^2 - kqQ/(0.03 - x)^2 = 0 can you please explain how you did it and why you felt the need? I know this stuff is so basic, and 90% of the time my math skills are sufficient for solving the problems, but every once in awhile I run into one where my math foundation clearly isn't up to par. After physics I will be taking math haha...

I am not sure you noticed this question?
 
  • #13
RyanBruceX said:
I think one was the answer I gave and one was a negative number so I dismissed it.
I am not sure you noticed this question?

Sorry, the other answer was not a negative it was 0.01757. I also realized that I was looking at the problem the wrong way and that the distance from Q1 to Q3 was x while the distance from Q2 to Q3 was x - 0.03.I understand now. Thank you for your help!
 
  • #14
Great! I think that was the 2nd answer that I got on my Post-It notes. I was surprised that there were 2 real answers, but it seems plausible that there could be 2 places along the x-axis where the conditions for zero force were met. Good job! :-)
 
  • #15
berkeman said:
Great! I think that was the 2nd answer that I got on my Post-It notes. I was surprised that there were 2 real answers, but it seems plausible that there could be 2 places along the x-axis where the conditions for zero force were met. Good job! :-)
How? That looks like a sign error if you get a second solution.

To the left of the larger charge, the larger charge always dominates -> no stable position.
In between, both forces always go in the same direction -> no stable position.
To the right, there is exactly one point where the distance ratio is correct.
 
  • #16
I'll re-check my calc in a bit. Too bad I threw away those Post-Its... :-)
 
  • #17
So assuming my algebra was correct, here is the quadratic equation:

[tex]x^2 - 0.12x + 0.0018 = 0[/tex]

[tex]x = \frac{-B +/- SQRT(B^2 -4AC)}{2A}[/tex]

[tex]x = \frac{0.12 +/- SQRT((0.12)^2 - 4(0.0018)}{2}[/tex]

[tex]x = \frac{0.12 +/- SQRT(0.0144 - 0.0064)}{2}[/tex]

[tex]x = \frac{0.12 +/- 0.008}{2}[/tex]

[tex]x = 0.064, 0.056[/tex]

Not sure why my answers are different from before, but hopefully showing my work helps to find any errors... :)

EDIT -- fixing some typos -- please wait...
 
Last edited:
  • #18
Check the result of the sqrt.
WolframAlpha
The smaller solution corresponds to the sign problem I mentioned (we would have to reverse the force direction there manually, then the solution vanishes).
 
  • #19
The solution I get is ##x=0.03(2\pm \sqrt{2})##=0.10243, 0.01757

The 0.01757 is not the physically realistic result, since it is less than the 0.03.

Chet
 
  • #20
Thanks a lot, guys :-)
 

1. How can I determine where to place Q to experience zero net force?

To determine where to place Q, you must first consider the forces acting on Q. Then, you can use the principle of vector addition to find the point where the net force is equal to zero. This point is called the equilibrium point.

2. What factors affect the placement of Q to experience zero net force?

The placement of Q is affected by the magnitude and direction of the forces acting on it, as well as the distance between Q and the other objects exerting force on it. Additionally, the mass of Q and the mass of the other objects also play a role in determining the equilibrium point.

3. Can Q experience zero net force at multiple points?

Yes, it is possible for Q to experience zero net force at multiple points. This occurs when the forces acting on Q are balanced, meaning they cancel each other out. In this case, Q can be placed at any of these points and still experience zero net force.

4. How does the placement of Q affect its motion when experiencing zero net force?

When Q is placed at the equilibrium point, it will not experience any acceleration or change in velocity. This means that Q will remain at rest if it was initially at rest, or continue to move with a constant velocity if it was already in motion. If Q is placed away from the equilibrium point, it will experience a net force and will either accelerate or decelerate depending on the direction of the net force.

5. Is there a mathematical equation for determining the placement of Q for zero net force?

Yes, the mathematical equation for determining the placement of Q for zero net force is ΣF=0, where ΣF represents the sum of all the forces acting on Q. This equation can be used to find the equilibrium point by setting the sum of the forces equal to zero and solving for the position of Q.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
203
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
537
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
854
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
896
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
182
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
163
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
227
Back
Top