Isn't the answer infinity?

A charge + 16 +16 C is fixed at each of the points x = 3 , 9 , 15 , , x=3, 9, 15, \ldots, \infty on the x x -axis, and a charge 16 -16 C is fixed at each of the points x = 6 , 12 , 18 , , x=6, 12, 18, \ldots, \infty on the x x -axis. Then find the potential at the origin due to these charges.

If the potential is of the form A ln B C π ε 0 \frac { A\ln B }{ C\pi { \varepsilon }_{ 0 } } , find A + B + C A+B+C , where A A and C C are co-prime and B B is prime.

Try more here!


The answer is 9.

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

1 solution

Aditya Kumar
Aug 12, 2015

Potential energy at the origin is given by:

V = 16 4 π ε 0 ( 1 3 1 6 + 1 9 1 12 + . . . ) = 16 4 π ε 0 . 1 3 ( 1 1 1 2 + 1 3 1 4 + . . . ) = 4. l n ( 2 ) 3 π ε 0 A + B + C = 4 + 2 + 3 = 9 V=\frac { 16 }{ 4\pi { \varepsilon }_{ 0 } } \left( \frac { 1 }{ 3 } -\frac { 1 }{ 6 } +\frac { 1 }{ 9 } -\frac { 1 }{ 12 } +... \right) \\ \quad =\frac { 16 }{ 4\pi { \varepsilon }_{ 0 } } .\frac { 1 }{ 3 } \left( \frac { 1 }{ 1 } -\frac { 1 }{ 2 } +\frac { 1 }{ 3 } -\frac { 1 }{ 4 } +... \right) \\ \quad =\frac { 4.ln(2) }{ 3\pi { \varepsilon }_{ 0 } } \\ \therefore \quad A+B+C=4+2+3=9

Shouldn't you be telling why that series is ln(2)?

Agnishom Chattopadhyay - 5 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

It is an expansion of ln(2). I learnt it from Wikipedia

Aditya Kumar - 5 years, 10 months ago

Hint: Use the fact that harmonic series can be expressed as

H ( n ) = l n ( n ) + γ + α 0 H(n)=ln(n)+\gamma+\alpha_0

Where γ \gamma is some constant and α 0 \alpha_0 is some zero-sequence.

Вук Радовић - 5 years, 9 months ago

This series the expansion of ln(1+x).Here the value of x is 1.

Akshay Sharma - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

How the value of x is one !

Rohit Yadv - 6 months, 4 weeks ago

Good Question!! Solved it the same way. But check your solution. A kiddish error. 4+2+3 = 9. :D

Abhinav Dixit - 5 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

Thanks for the report it was really kiddish :P

Aditya Kumar - 5 years, 10 months ago

However,this series is conditionally convergent,and it's terms can't be reordered.So can you explain why you have used this particular arrangement:see riemann's rearrangement theorem.

Aditya Anand - 5 years, 8 months ago

It is proportional to inverse of distance squared. So, where has the square gone. Please let me know

Rishabh Joshi - 2 years, 1 month ago

I am in second grade P

Bibi Fajroo - 1 year, 6 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...