Why does the method of images use a distance of 2x instead of just x?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the method of images in electrostatics, specifically addressing the scenario of a point charge near a conducting plane and the implications of energy calculations when moving the charge to infinity. Participants are exploring the reasoning behind the factor of 2x in the distance used in the method of images.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the energy calculations involved in moving a charge to infinity and question the reasoning behind the factor of 16 in the final answer. There is also an exploration of the energy stored in the electric fields and how the presence of the conductor affects this energy.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the calculations and the implications of the conducting plane on the energy considerations. There is an acknowledgment of different methods to approach the problem, but no consensus has been reached regarding the specific factor in the energy expression.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of specific homework problems, including assumptions about charge distributions and distances. The discussion includes references to the behavior of electric fields in the presence of conductors and the need for careful consideration of energy contributions from different regions.

-Vitaly-
Messages
39
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A point charge +q is initially at distance x from a conducting plane of infinite extent and held at zero potential. Find the work done in moving the charge to an infinite distance from the plane. Hence find the minimum energy an electron must have in order to escape
from a metal surface (assume that it starts at a distance 0.1nm, which is about one atomic diameter, from it). Express your answer in electron-volts.
[Answers: q^2/(16πε0x) ; 3.6eV]

Homework Equations


U=q(V2-V1)
Method of images

The Attempt at a Solution


The plane can be replaced with a negative -q point charge at a distance 2x. Therefore the energy required to move the charge to infinity=q(0-(-q/(4πε02x)))=q^2/(8πε0x). Why did they put 16 in the answer??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The reason for the factor of 1/2 is that the potential you've calculated is only valid above the plane; so if you think of the energy stored in the fields you see that if it really were just two point charges, the energy would be the same above and below the plane. In this case, the presence of the conductor means that only half of that energy is present---the half above the conductor.

You can work this out explicitly using two different methods:

(1) [tex]W=\frac{\epsilon_0}{2} \int_{\text{all space}}E^2dV[/tex]

--keep in mind that the field is actually zero below the plane!

(2)[tex]W=\int_{x}^{\infty} \vec{F}\cdot\vec{dl}=q\int_{x}^{\infty} \vec{E}\cdot\vec{dl}[/tex]
 
Ok, thank you :)
 
Another problem I've got:

Homework Statement


An infinite, thin, uniformly charged rod (line charge density λ) is situated parallel to a
metal plate a distance d above it. Use E=λ/(2πε0x ) (E at a point x m away from the rod, no other conductors are present) to calculate the E-field close
to the surface of the plate as a function of perpendicular distance to the rod.

Homework Equations


E=λ/(2πε0x

The Attempt at a Solution


Well, I drew field lines of the rod and the plane, and if looked in a plane perpendicular to the rod, the field lines look like half of a dipole, so maybe I thought maybe I can treat it as a dipole in this plane with charge dq? But I'm not sure what to do next? just add the two E?
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1980/clipboard01ro5.jpg
Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K