A community for students. Sign up today!
Here's the question you clicked on:
 0 viewing
 2 years ago
it is property of charges that like charge repel each other and unlike attract each other ....so how come dipole exists??? why not a positive and a negative charge attract each other , why they stay at a separation??
 2 years ago
it is property of charges that like charge repel each other and unlike attract each other ....so how come dipole exists??? why not a positive and a negative charge attract each other , why they stay at a separation??

This Question is Closed

henpen
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0You could artificially create one:dw:1346422170948:dw Then take off the conducting block at the top. A hydrogen atom CAN'T collapse in on itself, and is a dipole.

henpen
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsWDUqJQcpk&feature=player_detailpage#t=1594s

naveenbabbar
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Look at the definition of a dipole. It is an arrangement of two equal and opposite (non interacting) charges separated by a finite separation.

naveenbabbar
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0In case of an ideal dipole the magnitude of charges keeps on increasing and the distance between them is decreasing and still the charges are non interacting. This is an idealisat

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1that's the question how come they aren't attracted towards each other ? @naveenbabbar??

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1If you put real charges in an arrangement like that, they would be. But a dipole like that is just a model to recreate a particular type of electric field. If you'd like, imagine a polar molecule like HCl which can be modeled as a dipole because the electrons spend more time near one atom than the other, imparting essentially a partial positive and partial negative charge to the whole molecule.

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Or, alternatively, imagine that you had a metal rod in an electric field, so that charge built up on the ends:dw:1346430538059:dw

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1The field far away from the rod would be the sum of the externally applied E field and the field of an electric dipole, which is basically what the rod becomes in the presence of the external field.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0ghazi All the answers you ve got  not simple enough. And some NOT right. I will give you a hint to a simple (and true) answer: Let's suppose you love a beautiful girl (older then 18 of course) and she loves you passionately. But let's suppose that a cruel world/god/physics teacher/fate glued you to one side of a bridge and glued her to the opposite side. The glue is stronger than you. Surprise ! You cannot merge in passionate embrace. A variant: suppose hundreds of concrete walls separate you and her and you cannot break them  you won't meet neither.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Hey @ghazi  the way to your "other half" will be revealed by the evil magicianKoala only after you gift him a medal !

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1Your answer was "they don't touch because they can't". In what way is that helpful at all?

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I will explain: Question of @ghazi was literally "that's the question how come they aren't attracted towards each other ? " MEANING  MOVING to each other. Answer: sometimes obstacles block MOTION of mutually attracting charges. Santa Simplicata

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1well thanks for such a nice example @Mikael but i guess i have another explanation but no one agrees to that..and your answer is like violating property of charges

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I see many people typing

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0No ghazi  here is the actual Physical answer. Sorry go first

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1sorry this time i won't agree with you @Mikael because your explanation seems a bit pointless

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0We will read all the objections  and then refute them ALL together.

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1who has refuted....you haven't read mine!!

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1The fundamental misunderstanding behind the question is the assumption that dipoles are just free charges that are next to each other. That's not how nature works. But the field produced by such an arrangement is very similar to the one that arises from linear polarized molecules, fixed objects in external fields, and many other more physically plausible scenarios. The model dw:1346433236818:dw is just a useful simplification.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Thats what we said  waiting 4 Your objections

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0This is Exactly what I said but I will say it MORE PHYSICALLY EXPLICIT: Charges are NOT ONLY charges, they have other attractive and repulsive forces acting upon them, moreover they cannot move THROUGH solid ISOLATOR MATERIAL

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1how come an isolator comes at such a small separation ???

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0How small  one molecule is small enough for You ?

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0You can frequently meet polarized states with Extra electron on one end and deficient electron on the other end. And still NOT moving and not merging

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1The point of my response was that the above picture is just a model. You used an example with love and a bridge, so forgive me if I thought your answer was not sufficient to answer the question.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0jemurray I STATED that it is APRELIMINARY HINT ==>> for god's sake  we are supposed to stimulate thought, not give prepackaged answers , man!!!

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I wanted @ghazi to try and ask me "what is this glue?"

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0By the way none of you have asked this till NOW ...

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1first of all @Mikael don't be stagnant at your though ..listen to what @Jemurray3 is saying.... well i believe charges in dipole do get attracted but there is a limitation of it that is found by potential energy curve dw:1346433479155:dw see everything ins this universe wants to be at minimum potential energy and there is certain minimum distance at which potential energy of the system is minimum ....similarly charges do attract each other but after a certain distance that is 'r' if charges comes come closer force of attraction will be converted to repulsion and they both will have a certain minimum distance at which they can stay together ....distance of min potential energy .....please @Mikael read it carefully :)

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0This is Potential energy function of WHAT system @ghazi ?

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1to charges together ....dw:1346434024343:dw

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1If you could tone down the mindnumbing degree of selfrighteousness for a little while, that would be deeply appreciated. I understand that we're not supposed to give prepackaged answers but your response did absolutely nothing to illuminate a possible route to the solution of this CONCEPTUAL misunderstanding.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Sorry  this E_p is much more specific and does NOT describe any pair of opposite charges. Yes this is dealization of what I had in mind  for a specific case, the case of nucleus and and electron.

Jemurray3
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1I'm not going to turn this into an argument between the two of us. @ghazi that potential energy function is not representative of a dipole. I'm sure @Mikael would be more than happy to explain that it is more like the one you would find in a hydrogen atom. I have to leave for class, but good luck.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Yes @Jemurray3 I think it did, and how?  by prodding him to DEFINE ADDITIONAL forces that might act to block the approaching and merging of the charges. Which @ghazi did actually do  he describes already nuclear forces that prevent a free motion of chrge

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@jemurray i am not representing dipole....i just said that after certain distance it can't go further , closer

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ghazi your diagram requires other types of interaction so that the energy goes higher when the charges are "too" close. This happens near a nucleus

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1so accordin to you my answer ain't correct??

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0If you simply take 2 oppositely charged FREE particles. They will merge exactly as you expected

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1no..i didn't say merge..i mean to say that...they will come closer but not beyond that minimum potential energy distance

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0And again you are correct in your diagram, this describes MATTER. Charges inside atoms, quantization of matter NOT free charges. Not Positron+electron in free space

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0In free space there will be annihilation  electron and positron WILL merge.

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1okay..so what could be the explanation of this??

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Of what? I just told you that these are 2 SEPARATE situations 1 MAtter of Bound charges of opposite charge  no merging there 2 Free space motion where the merge and neutralize.

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1by the way i need to read further...to get a clear explanation and @Mikael photon ain't matter and your point of motion mass was discarded in the question.....i am still struggling with that one

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Dipole is a word. If you mean Molecular Dipole  the charges don't merge because the matter (molecule) between them is not conducting. If you mean Big Macroscopic Laboratory Dipole  aslo in between is a NONcoducting material. Wood, polymer which does not conduct etc.

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0C'mon  it sometimes seems that its is futile to teach you. Do you know that a notable part of the mass of our Sun, of other stars are photons ??!

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1dipole stands of two poles...

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1nothing is futile.....if you can go back then go and check that out ...

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Tell that to the Sun that it's mass is not matter. Tell that to rockets travelling on photon sails  that photons are not matter.

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1photon ain't matter..and if you have got any research paper stating photon is matter i would love to read that

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Matter is smething that posseses the following (not for You, not for ME,  the meaning given to it by science, by scientific definition) 1 Localized  major portion of the probability is in limited extension of space 2 Posseses momentum 3 Is counted in quanta (like units) That is THE DEFINITION. Photons satisfy it. By the way there are scores of massless particles  also considered matter.

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1okayy let's stop this here..come back to the question...finally i got your answer of my question i would read further and thanks a lot for your time

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1i am waiting for the explanation of @VincentLyon.Fr ...please suggest something here

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0If you want to discuss interesting and deep questions first read and tell us  what is SCIENTIFIC definition of matter. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, Mikael

Mikael
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0This was of course to @ghazi not anyone else

ghazi
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1@Mikael i will sir....and will let you know everything

VincentLyon.Fr
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.1The dipole is just a model of a charge distribution with a total charge equal to zero. It can be created: if you charge a nonconducting rod with positive charges on one end and negative charges on the other. These charges, although they do attract each other will not move towards each other since the rod does not allow it. This would be a macroscopic dipole. In a molecule, any difference in electronegativity will displace the barycentre of negative charges relative to that of the positive charges. What you obtain is best modelled by a dipole: i.e. you can fairly well predict what this molecule will cause and/or what it will undergo using the laws of the ideal dipole. It is the same if you study the motion of the Earth around the Sun. The Earth is best modelled by a pointmass, whereas in other cases, you should describe it as a solid sphere.
Ask your own question
Ask a QuestionFind more explanations on OpenStudy
Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.
spraguer
(Moderator)
5
→ View Detailed Profile
is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...
23
 Teamwork 19 Teammate
 Problem Solving 19 Hero
 Engagement 19 Mad Hatter
 You have blocked this person.
 ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...
Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.