Quantcast

Got Homework?

Connect with other students for help. It's a free community.

  • across
    MIT Grad Student
    Online now
  • laura*
    Helped 1,000 students
    Online now
  • Hero
    College Math Guru
    Online now

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

ghazi Group Title

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
  • 2 years ago

  • This Question is Closed
  1. henpen Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    You 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.

    • 2 years ago
  2. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    didn't get you

    • 2 years ago
  3. henpen Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsWDUqJQcpk&feature=player_detailpage#t=1594s

    • 2 years ago
  4. naveenbabbar Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Look at the definition of a dipole. It is an arrangement of two equal and opposite (non interacting) charges separated by a finite separation.

    • 2 years ago
  5. naveenbabbar Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    In 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

    • 2 years ago
  6. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    that's the question how come they aren't attracted towards each other ? @naveenbabbar??

    • 2 years ago
  7. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    If 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.

    • 2 years ago
  8. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Or, alternatively, imagine that you had a metal rod in an electric field, so that charge built up on the ends:|dw:1346430538059:dw|

    • 2 years ago
  9. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    The 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.

    • 2 years ago
  10. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    ghazi 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.

    • 2 years ago
  11. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Hey @ghazi - the way to your "other half" will be revealed by the evil magician-Koala only after you gift him a medal !

    • 2 years ago
  12. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Your answer was "they don't touch because they can't". In what way is that helpful at all?

    • 2 years ago
  13. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I 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

    • 2 years ago
  14. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    well 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

    • 2 years ago
  15. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I see many people typing

    • 2 years ago
  16. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @Mikael may i?

    • 2 years ago
  17. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    No ghazi - here is the actual Physical answer. Sorry go first

    • 2 years ago
  18. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    sorry this time i won't agree with you @Mikael because your explanation seems a bit pointless

    • 2 years ago
  19. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    We will read all the objections - and then refute them ALL together.

    • 2 years ago
  20. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    who has refuted....you haven't read mine!!

    • 2 years ago
  21. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    The 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.

    • 2 years ago
  22. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Thats what we said - waiting 4 Your objections

    • 2 years ago
  23. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    okay

    • 2 years ago
  24. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    This 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

    • 2 years ago
  25. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    how come an isolator comes at such a small separation ???

    • 2 years ago
  26. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    How small - one molecule is small enough for You ?

    • 2 years ago
  27. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    You 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

    • 2 years ago
  28. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    The 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.

    • 2 years ago
  29. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    jemurray I STATED that it is APRELIMINARY HINT ==>> for god's sake - we are supposed to stimulate thought, not give prepackaged answers , man!!!

    • 2 years ago
  30. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I wanted @ghazi to try and ask me "what is this glue?"

    • 2 years ago
  31. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    By the way none of you have asked this till NOW ...

    • 2 years ago
  32. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    first 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 :)

    • 2 years ago
  33. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    This is Potential energy function of WHAT system @ghazi ?

    • 2 years ago
  34. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    to charges together ....|dw:1346434024343:dw|

    • 2 years ago
  35. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    If you could tone down the mind-numbing degree of self-righteousness 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.

    • 2 years ago
  36. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Sorry - 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.

    • 2 years ago
  37. Jemurray3 Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I'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.

    • 2 years ago
  38. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @Vincent-Lyon.Fr??

    • 2 years ago
  39. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Yes @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

    • 2 years ago
  40. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    • 2 years ago
  41. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @jemurray i am not representing dipole....i just said that after certain distance it can't go further , closer

    • 2 years ago
  42. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 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

    • 2 years ago
  43. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    so accordin to you my answer ain't correct??

    • 2 years ago
  44. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    If you simply take 2 oppositely charged FREE particles. They will merge exactly as you expected

    • 2 years ago
  45. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    no..i didn't say merge..i mean to say that...they will come closer but not beyond that minimum potential energy distance

    • 2 years ago
  46. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    And 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

    • 2 years ago
  47. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    In free space there will be annihilation - electron and positron WILL merge.

    • 2 years ago
  48. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    okay..so what could be the explanation of this??

    • 2 years ago
  49. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Of 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.

    • 2 years ago
  50. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    in case of dipole ..

    • 2 years ago
  51. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    by 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

    • 2 years ago
  52. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Dipole 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 NON-coducting material. Wood, polymer which does not conduct etc.

    • 2 years ago
  53. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    C'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 ??!

    • 2 years ago
  54. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    dipole stands of two poles...

    • 2 years ago
  55. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    nothing is futile.....if you can go back then go and check that out ...

    • 2 years ago
  56. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Tell that to the Sun that it's mass is not matter. Tell that to rockets travelling on photon sails - that photons are not matter.

    • 2 years ago
  57. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    photon ain't matter..and if you have got any research paper stating photon is matter i would love to read that

    • 2 years ago
  58. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Matter 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.

    • 2 years ago
  59. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    okayy 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

    • 2 years ago
  60. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    i am waiting for the explanation of @Vincent-Lyon.Fr ...please suggest something here

    • 2 years ago
  61. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    If 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

    • 2 years ago
  62. Mikael Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    This was of course to @ghazi not anyone else

    • 2 years ago
  63. ghazi Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @Mikael i will sir....and will let you know everything

    • 2 years ago
  64. Vincent-Lyon.Fr Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    The dipole is just a model of a charge distribution with a total charge equal to zero. It can be created: if you charge a non-conducting 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 point-mass, whereas in other cases, you should describe it as a solid sphere.

    • 2 years ago
    • Attachments:

See more questions >>>

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
  • 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.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.