# Help with electric fields PLEASE

Announcements
#1
The very left plate is point A with 600 V and an electron beam is entered through which passes through point B 0V and goes to point C which is 1200V.

Now the question says "Describe and explain the effect on the current detected at C when the voltage of the grid B is increased negatively."

I have no idea what this is saying - 2824 January 2005 paper for diagram - I don't understand the markscheme either. Please help - thank you.
0
4 years ago
#2
(Original post by MrToodles4)
The very left plate is point A with 600 V and an electron beam is entered through which passes through point B 0V and goes to point C which is 1200V.

Now the question says "Describe and explain the effect on the current detected at C when the voltage of the grid B is increased negatively."

I have no idea what this is saying - 2824 January 2005 paper for diagram - I don't understand the markscheme either. Please help - thank you.
I can't find a link to that paper tbh... is it a triode valve?
0
#3
(Original post by Joinedup)
I can't find a link to that paper tbh... is it a triode valve?
I've attached it - 2f
0
4 years ago
#4
(Original post by MrToodles4)
The very left plate is point A with 600 V and an electron beam is entered through which passes through point B 0V and goes to point C which is 1200V.

Now the question says "Describe and explain the effect on the current detected at C when the voltage of the grid B is increased negatively."

I have no idea what this is saying - 2824 January 2005 paper for diagram - I don't understand the markscheme either. Please help - thank you.
(Original post by MrToodles4)
I've attached it - 2f
It means that when the potential at metal grid plate B becomes more negative, says from -10 V to -100 V, what would happen to the number of electrons hitting the metal plate C per unit time.
0
4 years ago
#5
(Original post by MrToodles4)
You also want to quote what you don’t understand from the MS.

You can redo (b) to (d) to work the new magnitude of electric field strength in (b) and the new minimum speed of an electron in (d) when the potential at metal grid plate B becomes more negative, says −100 V to make sense of the MS.
0
#6
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
It means that when the potential at metal grid plate B becomes more negative, says from -10 V to -100 V, what would happen to the number of electrons hitting the metal plate C per unit time.
It would decrease? As the electrons are more strongly repelled?? So to get to plate c hare are electron even moving through plate B?
0
4 years ago
#7
(Original post by MrToodles4)
It would decrease? As the electrons are more strongly repelled?? So to get to plate c hare are electron even moving through plate B?
(Original post by MrToodles4)
It would decrease? …..
Yes.

(Original post by MrToodles4)
… As the electrons are more strongly repelled?? ….
Yes. I would not use “electrons are more strongly repelled”. Use the concept of the work done by the electric field on the electrons.

(Original post by MrToodles4)
… So to get to plate c hare are electron even moving through plate B?
Not sure what you are asking here.
0
#8
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
Yes.

Yes. I would not use “electrons are more strongly repelled”. Use the concept of the work done by the electric field on the electrons.

How could you explain this concept? Would that mean more work is done for the electron to get to plate B? Since the electron is repelled.

Not sure what you are asking here.
Sorry, I didn't make full sense of the diagram - I was asking if to get to plate C the electron has to pass THROUGH plate B first? (which is in the direction of the electric field line from A to B) however, to get to C is has to do work against the repelling from C?
0
4 years ago
#9
(Original post by MrToodles4)
Sorry, I didn't make full sense of the diagram - I was asking if to get to plate C the electron has to pass THROUGH plate B first? (which is in the direction of the electric field line from A to B) however, to get to C is has to do work against the repelling from C?

I think you are confused here. It is good that you revise about electric field.

Electron is a negatively charged particle, so when a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field, it would move (naturally) in the direction opposite to direction of electric field. (Why? I believe any A level physics students need to know.)

If electron needs to move in the direction of the electric field, then an external agent needs to do work on the electron.

This is usually the confusing part in electric field because students tend to confuse with the movement of positively charged particle in electric field.

Coming back to question.
When moving electrons pass through the hole in plate A, the electric field is doing negative work on electrons. This is why electrons need minimum speed (as asked by the question) to reach B. If the initial speeds of the electrons at A is greater than the minimum speed, the electrons would pass B and then it would just go to C naturally. (Why?)
0
4 years ago
#10
The questions of why in post number 9 are important for you to understand the concept electric field, do ensure you know how to answer.
0
#11
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
I think you are confused here. It is good that you revise about electric field.

Electron is a negatively charged particle, so when a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field, it would move (naturally) in the direction opposite to direction of electric field. (Why? I believe any A level physics students need to know.)
Because the field lines go from the positive plate to the negative plate? And so electrons would be attracted to the positive?

If electron needs to move in the direction of the electric field, then an external agent needs to do work on the electron.

This is usually the confusing part in electric field because students tend to confuse with the movement of positively charged particle in electric field.

That makes sense now.

Coming back to question.
When moving electrons pass through the hole in plate A, the electric field is doing negative work on electrons. This is why electrons need minimum speed (as asked by the question) to reach B. If the initial speeds of the electrons at A is greater than the minimum speed, the electrons would pass B and then it would just go to C naturally. (Why?)

Same reason as above?
0
4 years ago
#12
(Original post by MrToodles4)
Because the field lines go from the positive plate to the negative plate? And so electrons would be attracted to the positive?

If electron needs to move in the direction of the electric field, then an external agent needs to do work on the electron.

This is usually the confusing part in electric field because students tend to confuse with the movement of positively charged particle in electric field.

That makes sense now.

Coming back to question.
When moving electrons pass through the hole in plate A, the electric field is doing negative work on electrons. This is why electrons need minimum speed (as asked by the question) to reach B. If the initial speeds of the electrons at A is greater than the minimum speed, the electrons would pass B and then it would just go to C naturally. (Why?)

Same reason as above?

If you answer the two why questions based on work done by the electric field, then the two answers would be identical.

However, if you answer using repulsion and attraction, then you need to be careful. Again why?

My first why in post 9, did not mention about any positive plate or negative plate, I just say “when a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field”.

As for the second why, it is pertaining to the question that you posted, so your answer is with the positive plate and negative plate is good.

“Because the field lines go from the positive plate to the negative plate. And so electrons would be attracted to the positive.”

This is the usual answer I would get from students when they do not pay attention to the different setup of the question. The difference is subtle but important in understanding the concept of electric field and the work done by the electric field.

Think about the first why based on the work done by the electric field and electric force on the electron before seeing the answer.

Spoiler:
Show

When a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field, the electric force acts on the electron in the direction opposite to direction of electric field.

This net force would cause the electron to accelerate, the KE of electron would increase. According to conservation of energy, the electric potential energy of the electron-electric field system must decrease.

Can we account for the decrease in electric PE? Yes. If you find the work done by the electric field, it is positive. Since work done by conservative forces increases kinetic energy and decreases potential energy by that amount and electric force is a conservative force, so
W = ΔK = −ΔU

This explanation may sound confusing. It is ok. Compare the movement of positively charged particle and negatively charged particle in a uniform electric field set up by two metal plates that has a p.d. of V.

It takes some time to sink in. Your eureka moment will come. 0
#13
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
If you answer the two why questions based on work done by the electric field, then the two answers would be identical.

However, if you answer using repulsion and attraction, then you need to be careful. Again why?

My first why in post 9, did not mention about any positive plate or negative plate, I just say “when a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field”.

As for the second why, it is pertaining to the question that you posted, so your answer is with the positive plate and negative plate is good.

“Because the field lines go from the positive plate to the negative plate. And so electrons would be attracted to the positive.”

This is the usual answer I would get from students when they do not pay attention to the different setup of the question. The difference is subtle but important in understanding the concept of electric field and the work done by the electric field.

Think about the first why based on the work done by the electric field and electric force on the electron before seeing the answer.

Spoiler:
Show

When a stationary electron is placed in an uniform electric field, the electric force acts on the electron in the direction opposite to direction of electric field.

This net force would cause the electron to accelerate, the KE of electron would increase. According to conservation of energy, the electric potential energy of the electron-electric field system must decrease.

Can we account for the decrease in electric PE? Yes. If you find the work done by the electric field, it is negative which means that there is decrease in electric PE.

This explanation may sound confusing. It is ok. Compare the movement of positively charged particle and negatively charged particle in a uniform electric field set up by two metal plates that has a p.d. of V.

It takes some time to sink in. Your eureka moment will come. Yeah it is quite confusing - So what is the reason for an electric force to be in the opposite direction to the electric field?
And in post 9 when you said 'negative work done' - I haven't really heard this term be used before so Im not entirely sure what you mean - because the pd across plate B has negative values? (do you mean because the plate is attractive - therefore negative work is done?) - Im quite confused with that statement. Many thanks.

I know of electric forces and magnetic forces being (equal?) opposite to each other but Im not sure how electric fields come into this...
0
4 years ago
#14
(Original post by MrToodles4)
Yeah it is quite confusing - So what is the reason for an electric force to be in the opposite direction to the electric field?
And in post 9 when you said 'negative work done' - I haven't really heard this term be used before so Im not entirely sure what you mean - because the pd across plate B has negative values? (do you mean because the plate is attractive - therefore negative work is done?) - Im quite confused with that statement. Many thanks.

I know of electric forces and magnetic forces being (equal?) opposite to each other but Im not sure how electric fields come into this...

I just realized I make a mistake in post 12 and I would correct it later.

I am very surprised that you have not heard about “negative work done”. I believe you have studied work and conservation of energy. Say, for instance, a block of mass is moving on a rough surface horizontally, it would be subjected to frictional force only (ignore normal force and weight). In this scenario, the frictional force is acting in the opposite direction of the mass is moving. This means that the work done by the frictional force is negative and the block would slow down.

When I said “When moving electrons pass through the hole in plate A, the electric field is doing negative work on electrons.”, the italicized word can be rephrased as work done by the electric field or electric force on the electron is negative. When I say the work done by the electric force is negative is based on the concept of work. The electric force acting on the electron (when electron is between plate A and B) is in the direction from B to A and electron is moving from A to B. According to the work done “formula” (Fx cos θ), the work done will be negative because the angle between force and displacement is 180°. This negative work done is similar to the work done by the frictional force which is usually negative.
0
#15
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
I just realized I make a mistake in post 12 and I would correct it later.

I am very surprised that you have not heard about “negative work done”. I believe you have studied work and conservation of energy. Say, for instance, a block of mass is moving on a rough surface horizontally, it would be subjected to frictional force only (ignore normal force and weight). In this scenario, the frictional force is acting in the opposite direction of the mass is moving. This means that the work done by the frictional force is negative and the block would slow down.

When I said “When moving electrons pass through the hole in plate A, the electric field is doing negative work on electrons.”, the italicized word can be rephrased as work done by the electric field or electric force on the electron is negative. When I say the work done by the electric force is negative is based on the concept of work. The electric force acting on the electron (when electron is between plate A and B) is in the direction from B to A and electron is moving from A to B. According to the work done “formula” (Fx cos θ), the work done will be negative because the angle between force and displacement is 180°. This negative work done is similar to the work done by the frictional force which is usually negative.
Alright negative work donee being done does make sense -

In terms if why the electric force is in the opposite direction to the field...so I basically have to remember that the force acting on an electron is always in the opposite direction to the direction of the electric field??

And what was the mistake?? Theres no edits for post 12 done yet.
You said electric force is in the opposite direction of electric field lines - so how would the electron be accelerating then? Its decelerating no?
0
4 years ago
#16
Did anyone else look at the diagram and start thinking about diffraction for a sec? 0
X

new posts Back
to top
Latest

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

### Poll

Join the discussion

They're better than I expected (142)
40.57%
They're exactly what I expected (86)
24.57%
They're lower than I expected (122)
34.86%