Why is the resultant electric field pointed like this?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the electric field generated by two charges, +4μC and -8μC, positioned 80mm apart. At point P, equidistant from both charges, the electric fields due to each charge are analyzed. The resultant electric field is not directed solely towards the -8μC charge because the -8μC charge exerts a stronger electric field, being twice the magnitude of the +4μC charge. This imbalance causes the resultant electric field to point slightly upwards and to the right, rather than directly horizontal. The positioning of point P below the line connecting the charges further clarifies this resultant direction.
curiousjoe94
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Heres the question:

Two charges (one is +4μC, the other is -8μC). They lie on 80mm apart, so you can imagine that the +4μC charge is on the left and the -8μC is on the right. Point P is equidistant from the two charges, draw two arrows at P to represent the directions and relative magnitudes of the component of the electric field at P due to each of the charges. Hence draw an arow labelled R at P to represent the resultant electric field at P.


The main query I have is the resultant force bit of the question. Why is that the resultant force isn't just pointed horizontal towards the -8μC charge?

It says in the mark scheme that, ''If the two charges were equal in magnitude but opposite in sign the resultant electric field at P would be directed horizontally to the right. Since one charge is twice the other, the resultant is directed slightly upwards and towards the right.''

Why does the fact that the magnitude of one of the electric field is twice that of the other, cause the resultant to be altered from what 'should' be a straight-forward horizontal direction from charge +4μC to charge -8μC?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It sounds like the point P doesn't lie on the line connecting the two charges.
 
vela said:
It sounds like the point P doesn't lie on the line connecting the two charges.

If that's the case, then it makes sense having point P lying below both those charges.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top