thank you so much sir for helping physics students in understanding. sir it would be my humble request to you if you could even upload options like:- imaging and astrophysics. :-)
Hello Mr. Chris Doner. A huge thank you for the use of your excellent videos in Physics class. I teach IB Physics and have been using your videos a lot. Is there a copy right issue regarding using them in class? thank you .Dan Megarity Physics teacher at the American School in Guangzhou China
@@donerphysics Thank you very much Mr. Doner for your permission in the spirit of collaboration. My students will benefit greatly from your excellent videos . Dan
In most simple terms, electric potential is energy whereas electric potential is energy per charge. If we have two positive charges near each other and we release one of them, it gets pushed away and gains kinetic energy. The maximum KE that it could gain in this process would be the electric potential energy. We might however be more interested in the electric potential at the location of one of the charges due to the other charge. (Think of the electric potential as a field) In this case, we would take the kinetic energy that could be gained by the charge, and divide out the charge, so that it just has to do with the location of the charge, and not the size of the charge at the location.
Hi sir, so i just wanted to clarify - electric/ gravitational field strength is the amount of force acting per unit fundamental quantity in a field while electric/gravitational potential is the amount of energy acting per unit fundamental quantity in a field right? Please correct me if I got the concept wrong sir
Basically yes but they are working definitions and do not use the word "acts" for energy. For proper definitions do not forget to add that small test charges/masses must be used, and energy doesn't act the way that force does. so do not use that word. The IB would prefer that you said the potential is the work per unit charge to move a small test charge from infinity to a point.
You are doing work against a force. It is like compressing a spring, and the spring stores energy. Release the spring and the charge speeds up gaining kinetic energy.
Since positive potential indicates that the test charge gains kinetic energy, does negative potential indicate that the test loses kinetic energy? If so, what would this loss in kinetic energy have as comparison frames i.e, what will be the amount of kinetic energy it loses, given that it is not given that the test charge will have any kinetic energy at the point in space of the potential
Positive potential energy corresponds to repulsive forces and negative energy to attractive forces. The idea is that if the particles do not interact, the PE should be zero.
Hey Mr. Doner, where do you get the images in your videos from (like at 10:17)? (The ones that look like they are from a textbook) Great videos, thank you.
Upon integrating the force equation (Coulomb's law equation), I get the same value but in negative. Why is this so? Moreover, is it correct to say that positive potential indicates that some external force in addition to the already present electrostatic force has been used to bring the test mass to the point in space whereas negative potential indicates that the already present electrostatic force has been used to bring the point mass to the point in space?
@@donerphysics So when I integrate the equation for the force, should I actually be getting a negative value? (I get -kQq/r upon integrating kQq/r^2) I do not think that should be the case since the equation for the electrical potential energy would then result in a negative value with 2 positive charges.
Hey chris, when watching this video i got confused regarding how to you ended up with positive work for both going against the field and going away from it. When i was working through the question at time 5:00, i took the electric potential difference to be (2-5) which is final minus initial, thus receiving a potential difference of -3. I then multiplied that by 2 to end up with an answer for work as -6. Does that make sense? because work is negative when the force is opposing the direction of the displacement, however in this particular instance, the force and the displacement were parallel to one another and in the same direction. I interpreted the negative 6 as there was an energy transfer of -6 joules from electrical potential energy to + 6 joules of kinetic energy.
Yes, notice that I write the "loss" of PE. A loss would be negative. The work done to move the charge from 5V to 2V would be negative. You would have to push against the motion for it to move at constant speed. We do positive work in moving positive charges to higher PE.
Chris Doner I am still confused, the electric field lines are directed in a manner whereby it goes from the higher electric potential to the lower. The 5 v is the greater electric potential so the field lines would go from 5 to two. So the force when moving the positive charge from 5v to 2v would be in the direction of the motion right? So the work is not negative? Unless I have misunderstood.
Living in Istanbul, Turkey. Have an IB Physics Exam tomorrow inhsaallah. Much appreciate your efforts of teaching.
Good to hear!
Thank you so much. This was my worst topic and now it makes sense!:)
Thank you so much, these videos make these concepts so understandable and friendly. Very much appreciated!! :)
Thank you so much, you saved me for my tests!!!
Really Great Videos. You make concepts so easy to understand.
You are a legend Sir
Much appreciated.
Thank you so much. I appreciate your videos an insane amount.
So glad you like them!
thank you so much sir for helping physics students in understanding. sir it would be my humble request to you if you could even upload options like:- imaging and astrophysics. :-)
thanks i understood everything clearly
Glad it helped!
Hello Mr. Chris Doner. A huge thank you for the use of your excellent videos in Physics class. I teach IB Physics and have been using your videos a lot. Is there a copy right issue regarding using them in class? thank you .Dan Megarity Physics teacher at the American School in Guangzhou China
Good to hear!...no copyright issue.
@@donerphysics Thank you very much Mr. Doner for your permission in the spirit of collaboration. My students will benefit greatly from your excellent videos . Dan
what is the definition of electric potential energy? I'm finding it really difficult to wrap my head around it. How does it differ from potential?
In most simple terms, electric potential is energy whereas electric potential is energy per charge. If we have two positive charges near each other and we release one of them, it gets pushed away and gains kinetic energy. The maximum KE that it could gain in this process would be the electric potential energy. We might however be more interested in the electric potential at the location of one of the charges due to the other charge. (Think of the electric potential as a field) In this case, we would take the kinetic energy that could be gained by the charge, and divide out the charge, so that it just has to do with the location of the charge, and not the size of the charge at the location.
absolute gigachad
Is that good?
Hi sir, so i just wanted to clarify - electric/ gravitational field strength is the amount of force acting per unit fundamental quantity in a field while electric/gravitational potential is the amount of energy acting per unit fundamental quantity in a field right? Please correct me if I got the concept wrong sir
Basically yes but they are working definitions and do not use the word "acts" for energy. For proper definitions do not forget to add that small test charges/masses must be used, and energy doesn't act the way that force does. so do not use that word. The IB would prefer that you said the potential is the work per unit charge to move a small test charge from infinity to a point.
i love electric potential
8:04 why does bringing a positive charge to a higher potential mean more work?
You are doing work against a force. It is like compressing a spring, and the spring stores energy. Release the spring and the charge speeds up gaining kinetic energy.
Since positive potential indicates that the test charge gains kinetic energy, does negative potential indicate that the test loses kinetic energy? If so, what would this loss in kinetic energy have as comparison frames i.e, what will be the amount of kinetic energy it loses, given that it is not given that the test charge will have any kinetic energy at the point in space of the potential
Positive potential energy corresponds to repulsive forces and negative energy to attractive forces. The idea is that if the particles do not interact, the PE should be zero.
@@donerphysics That makes sense. Thank you so much!
Hey Mr. Doner, where do you get the images in your videos from (like at 10:17)? (The ones that look like they are from a textbook) Great videos, thank you.
Most are from Paul Hewitt's Conceptual Physics...a great textbook.
Fizik sınıfına selam olsun !
Upon integrating the force equation (Coulomb's law equation), I get the same value but in negative. Why is this so? Moreover, is it correct to say that positive potential indicates that some external force in addition to the already present electrostatic force has been used to bring the test mass to the point in space whereas negative potential indicates that the already present electrostatic force has been used to bring the point mass to the point in space?
Negative potential simply means the object is trapped by the field. That is, there is an attractive force.
@@donerphysics So when I integrate the equation for the force, should I actually be getting a negative value? (I get -kQq/r upon integrating kQq/r^2) I do not think that should be the case since the equation for the electrical potential energy would then result in a negative value with 2 positive charges.
E=-delta V / delta x, so V=- integral E delta x. You can look this proof up many places online.
Hey chris, when watching this video i got confused regarding how to you ended up with positive work for both going against the field and going away from it. When i was working through the question at time 5:00, i took the electric potential difference to be (2-5) which is final minus initial, thus receiving a potential difference of -3. I then multiplied that by 2 to end up with an answer for work as -6. Does that make sense? because work is negative when the force is opposing the direction of the displacement, however in this particular instance, the force and the displacement were parallel to one another and in the same direction. I interpreted the negative 6 as there was an energy transfer of -6 joules from electrical potential energy to + 6 joules of kinetic energy.
Yes, notice that I write the "loss" of PE. A loss would be negative. The work done to move the charge from 5V to 2V would be negative. You would have to push against the motion for it to move at constant speed. We do positive work in moving positive charges to higher PE.
Chris Doner I am still confused, the electric field lines are directed in a manner whereby it goes from the higher electric potential to the lower. The 5 v is the greater electric potential so the field lines would go from 5 to two. So the force when moving the positive charge from 5v to 2v would be in the direction of the motion right? So the work is not negative? Unless I have misunderstood.
E field points from high potential to low so you do positive work in moving a positive charge to higher potential. The field force does negative work.