This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .

Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.

Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.

Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.

Markdown

Appears as

*italics* or _italics_

italics

**bold** or __bold__

bold

- bulleted - list

bulleted

list

1. numbered 2. list

numbered

list

Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly

@Karan Chatrath
–
@Karan Chatrath OMG there is a coincidence if you watch answer basically the $L$ in your answer is managing the need of square root.
That's really sexy.

@Talulah Riley
–
I think that the book is wrong here. I have done a numerical simulation and checked the expression that I got and the one in the book, and the one I have obtained seems correct. I even checked various possible cases by varying the initial separation parameter.

@Steven Chase could you validate this observation when possible?

@Karan Chatrath
–
I'm not even convinced that there is a maximum distance. I got the following results with the numerical values given in the code. It looks like the local maxima might just keep increasing.

@Steven Chase
–
I ran a quick simulation with your code and I see that the progressively increasing separation is a numerical issue that you seem to be having. If I use the explicit Euler solver, I get a result similar to yours. I am using a higher-order accurate integrator.

@Karan Chatrath
–
Yes, I neglected to check with multiple time steps and compare. When I run with a microsecond time step, the drift upwards is much smaller, but still there. It almost seems as if with a very small time step, the particle separation will oscillate between $L$ and zero in perpetuity.

@Steven Chase
–
I think it oscillates between $0.083$ and $L$. This is the value I get with the expression and also validated using simulations. From the plots, it looks like zero as 0.083 is a relatively small magnitude.

@Steven Chase
–
Yes, initially, I just solved for the fixed points of $\dot{x}=f(x)$ and thought that my job is done. But when @Lil Doug shared the answer with me, showing the various cases, I realised that I had not thought it through. Having said that, I do think that the expression that the book shows is not correct.

@Steven Chase
–
I ran the simulation using the following parameters and got the result with matches with the expression that I derived. While testing with closed-form expressions, I like to use irrational numbers as parameters.

Apply initial conditions and solve for integration constant $C$. Finally, the separation is max or min when $\dot{x} = 0$. Equating $\dot{x}=0$ gives a quadratic equations, one root of which is obviously $L$. The other is:

$d = \frac{q(M+m)}{4 \pi \epsilon_o EL(M-m)}$

Whether $d$ is a max or min can be confirmed by a second derivative test, which gives rise to cases.

Easy Math Editor

This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in`\(`

...`\)`

or`\[`

...`\]`

to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestIs the answer:

$d_{max} = \frac{q(M+m)}{4 \pi \epsilon_o EL(M-m)}$

Log in to reply

@Karan Chatrath No,but very very near to correct answer. I am not telling you answer because you always say, don't tell answer.

Log in to reply

Maybe I am missing something. Cannot spot my mistake.

Log in to reply

@Karan Chatrath if you don't mind me, your answer is also incorrect with dimension.

By the way, do you like to see answer?

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

$L$ in your answer is managing the need of square root.

@Karan Chatrath OMG there is a coincidence if you watch answer basically theThat's really sexy.

Log in to reply

@Steven Chase could you validate this observation when possible?

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

$L$ and zero in perpetuity.

Yes, I neglected to check with multiple time steps and compare. When I run with a microsecond time step, the drift upwards is much smaller, but still there. It almost seems as if with a very small time step, the particle separation will oscillate betweenLog in to reply

$0.083$ and $L$. This is the value I get with the expression and also validated using simulations. From the plots, it looks like zero as 0.083 is a relatively small magnitude.

I think it oscillates betweenLog in to reply

$L$ for those numbers. But the expression doesn't reduce to $L$, does it?

So the max separation isLog in to reply

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

$\dot{x}=f(x)$ and thought that my job is done. But when @Lil Doug shared the answer with me, showing the various cases, I realised that I had not thought it through. Having said that, I do think that the expression that the book shows is not correct.

Yes, initially, I just solved for the fixed points ofLog in to reply

$q = \sqrt{2}$ $E = \sqrt{5}$ $L = \frac{\pi}{20}$ $m = \mathrm{e}$ $M = \mathrm{e}^2$ $\epsilon_o = 1$

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

@Steven Chase My attempt:

Coordinate of $M$ is $x_1$ and that of $m$ is $x_2$.

Let:

$x = x_1 - x_2$

Applying Newton's second law gives:

$M\ddot{x}_1 = qE + \frac{Kq^2}{x^2}$ $m\ddot{x}_2 = qE - \frac{Kq^2}{x^2}$

Manipulating and rearranging both equations gives:

$\ddot{x}_1 - \ddot{x}_2 = \frac{Kq^2}{x^2}\left(\frac{1}{M} + \frac{1}{m}\right) + qE\left(\frac{1}{M} - \frac{1}{m}\right)$

$\implies \ddot{x} = A + \frac{B}{x^2}$

$A = qE\left(\frac{1}{M} - \frac{1}{m}\right)$ $B =Kq^2\left(\frac{1}{M} + \frac{1}{m}\right)$

$x(0) = L$ $\dot{x}(0) = 0$

$\ddot{x} = A + \frac{B}{x^2}$ $\implies \dot{x} d(\dot{x}) = \left(A + \frac{B}{x^2}\right) \ dx$

Integrating gives:

$\frac{\dot{x}^2}{2} = A + \frac{B}{x^2} + C$

Apply initial conditions and solve for integration constant $C$. Finally, the separation is max or min when $\dot{x} = 0$. Equating $\dot{x}=0$ gives a quadratic equations, one root of which is obviously $L$. The other is:

$d = \frac{q(M+m)}{4 \pi \epsilon_o EL(M-m)}$

Whether $d$ is a max or min can be confirmed by a second derivative test, which gives rise to cases.

Log in to reply

Does this method distinguish between local and global maxima?

Log in to reply

Since we are solving a quadratic equation which has only two solutions, the local maxima and minima are actually the global maxima and minima.

Log in to reply

@Karan Chatrath in the 3rd line of your solution it will be $m$

Log in to reply

Nice catch. Corrected now.

Log in to reply

@Lil Doug Bro your problems are

really hard. Lol.Log in to reply