Work done assembling a system of charges?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of work done in assembling a system of static point charges, particularly focusing on the conditions under which the work can be negative. Participants explore the implications of electric forces acting between charges and the relationship between work, force, and distance in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why the work done to assemble a positive and negative charge is negative, despite understanding the formula W = -kq^2/r.
  • Another participant notes that the work required to assemble the charges being negative indicates that work is extracted during the process, suggesting that the electric force contributes to kinetic energy if not countered.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that the work-energy theorem applies to charged bodies as well, and the relevant force and path taken determine whether work is done.
  • One participant questions the application of the force equation W = Fd, suggesting that for charged bodies, the situation differs from neutral bodies.
  • Another participant reflects on the idea that doing negative work may involve slowing the particles to a stop at a given moment.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the work-energy relationship in the context of charged bodies, with no clear consensus on the implications of negative work or the application of force equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of applying classical mechanics principles to charged systems, noting the need to consider electric forces and their effects on work and energy.

x86
Gold Member
Messages
256
Reaction score
18
This is a concept that has long since plagued me. I will quote an article off of Google about the concept I am confused about:

"Consider a collection of
img532.png
static point charges
img561.png
located at position vectors
img562.png
(where
img536.png
runs from 1 to
img532.png
). What is the electrostatic energy stored in such a collection? Another way of asking this is, how much work would we have to do in order to assemble the charges, starting from an initial state in which they are all at rest and very widely separated? " [http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node56.html]

So, I understand the general concept. But I am confused in one of the cases. The case where the work that we do is negative (i.e. the work that we have to do to assemble the charge is < 0).

Here is an example that I will use to illustrate my confusion:

Say that we have two charges q in space, one positive, and one negative, and want to move them close to each other, to a distance of r.

The answerof course, is that the work that we need to do to bring the negative charge to the positive charge is then W = -kq^2/r < 0. I know this is the answer, and I know how to solve these problems. But I have no idea why this is true.

I am confused about the concept. I will try to explain what I am confused about below:

It is known that W = Fd. In this case , d = (infinity - r)

But I am confused about this, because essentially the charges attract one another. Therefore, we don't really have to apply any force to make them get close to each other, because an electric force will handle this for us. So our applied force F = 0. Then W = 0*d = 0. But of course, this is wrong. Because we know the answer to be W = -kq^2/r. But why?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
x86 said:
This is a concept that has long since plagued me. I will quote an article off of Google about the concept I am confused about:

"Consider a collection of
img532.png
static point charges
img561.png
located at position vectors
img562.png
(where
img536.png
runs from 1 to
img532.png
). What is the electrostatic energy stored in such a collection? Another way of asking this is, how much work would we have to do in order to assemble the charges, starting from an initial state in which they are all at rest and very widely separated? " [http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node56.html]

So, I understand the general concept. But I am confused in one of the cases. The case where the work that we do is negative (i.e. the work that we have to do to assemble the charge is < 0).

Here is an example that I will use to illustrate my confusion:

Say that we have two charges q in space, one positive, and one negative, and want to move them close to each other, to a distance of r.

The answerof course, is that the work that we need to do to bring the negative charge to the positive charge is then W = -kq^2/r < 0. I know this is the answer, and I know how to solve these problems. But I have no idea why this is true.

I am confused about the concept. I will try to explain what I am confused about below:

It is known that W = Fd. In this case , d = (infinity - r)

But I am confused about this, because essentially the charges attract one another. Therefore, we don't really have to apply any force to make them get close to each other, because an electric force will handle this for us. So our applied force F = 0. Then W = 0*d = 0. But of course, this is wrong. Because we know the answer to be W = -kq^2/r. But why?
x86 said:
This is a concept that has long since plagued me. I will quote an article off of Google about the concept I am confused about:

"Consider a collection of
img532.png
static point charges
img561.png
located at position vectors
img562.png
(where
img536.png
runs from 1 to
img532.png
). What is the electrostatic energy stored in such a collection? Another way of asking this is, how much work would we have to do in order to assemble the charges, starting from an initial state in which they are all at rest and very widely separated? " [http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node56.html]

So, I understand the general concept. But I am confused in one of the cases. The case where the work that we do is negative (i.e. the work that we have to do to assemble the charge is < 0).

Here is an example that I will use to illustrate my confusion:

Say that we have two charges q in space, one positive, and one negative, and want to move them close to each other, to a distance of r.

The answerof course, is that the work that we need to do to bring the negative charge to the positive charge is then W = -kq^2/r < 0. I know this is the answer, and I know how to solve these problems. But I have no idea why this is true.

I am confused about the concept. I will try to explain what I am confused about below:

It is known that W = Fd. In this case , d = (infinity - r)

But I am confused about this, because essentially the charges attract one another. Therefore, we don't really have to apply any force to make them get close to each other, because an electric force will handle this for us. So our applied force F = 0. Then W = 0*d = 0. But of course, this is wrong. Because we know the answer to be W = -kq^2/r. But why?
It is known that W=F.d for neutral bodies but the case changes totally for charged bodies. We have equation of force F=qE for charged bodies so we can not put F=0 in case of charged bodies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That the work required to assemble the charges is negative simply means that you would extract work from doing so. Unless you counter the electric force with a force in the other direction, the final configuration will involve moving charges, which simply means the work done by the electric force has instead gone into kinetic energy of the constituents.
 
Muhammad Nauman said:
It is known that W=F.d for neutral bodies but the case changes totally for charged bodies.

There is absolutely nothing special about neutral bodies in the work-energy theorem. The only relevant issue is which force you consider and the path taken, which will determine if the force you considered did work or not.
 
Orodruin said:
That the work required to assemble the charges is negative simply means that you would extract work from doing so. Unless you counter the electric force with a force in the other direction, the final configuration will involve moving charges, which simply means the work done by the electric force has instead gone into kinetic energy of the constituents.

Ah, so by doing negative work I'm essentially slowing the particles to a stop, at this snapshot in time?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
992
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K