Sjmarf@sh.itjust.works to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agoHehsh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square35fedilinkarrow-up1800arrow-down117 cross-posted to: mathmemes@lemmy.blahaj.zonescience_memes@mander.xyz
arrow-up1783arrow-down1imageHehsh.itjust.worksSjmarf@sh.itjust.works to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agomessage-square35fedilink cross-posted to: mathmemes@lemmy.blahaj.zonescience_memes@mander.xyz
minus-squareLimitless_screaming@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up4·1 year agoIn this case yes, but if q1 was -20μC, q2 was 30μC, and r was 0.5m, then using -20μC as it is would make F equal to -21.6N which is just 21.6N of attraction force between the two charges.
minus-squarePelicanenlinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 year agoIf they are oppositely charged particles, I would expect that there is a force of attraction acting on them, yes.
minus-squareLimitless_screaming@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoI am not saying that’s wrong, just that there’s 21.6N of attraction force between the two charges not -21.6N.
minus-squareBene7rddso@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoNo, if the force is negative it acts in the opposite direction
minus-squarePelicanenlinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 year agoYes, and a force acting in the opposite direction of the distance is an attractive force.
In this case yes, but if q1 was -20μC, q2 was 30μC, and r was 0.5m, then using -20μC as it is would make F equal to -21.6N which is just 21.6N of attraction force between the two charges.
If they are oppositely charged particles, I would expect that there is a force of attraction acting on them, yes.
I am not saying that’s wrong, just that there’s 21.6N of attraction force between the two charges not -21.6N.
But those are the same thing.
No, if the force is negative it acts in the opposite direction
Yes, and a force acting in the opposite direction of the distance is an attractive force.