\documentclass{article}

\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\setlength{\parindent}{0in}

\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{epstopdf}
\usepackage{enumerate}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}

\lhead{4 -- ENERGY}
\rhead{Last Updated: \today}
%\lfoot{Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License}
\lfoot{Back to \nameref{sec:toc}} 
\cfoot{}
\rfoot{\thepage}

% useful math stuff
\newcommand{\gv}[1]{\ensuremath{\mbox{\boldmath$ #1 $}}} 
\newcommand{\grad}[1]{\gv{\nabla} #1} % for gradient
\let\divsymb=\div % rename builtin command \div to \divsymb
\renewcommand{\div}[1]{\gv{\nabla} \cdot #1} % for divergence
\newcommand{\curl}[1]{\gv{\nabla} \times #1} % for curl

\newcommand{\given}[1]{{\bf Given: #1}}
\newcommand{\adapted}[1]{{\bf Adapted from:} \normalfont #1}

\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\bf {\large 4.\arabic{enumi}} }
\newcommand{\bl}{\bf \large}

\makeatletter
\def\namedlabel#1#2{\begingroup
   \def\@currentlabel{#2}%
   \label{#1}\endgroup
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

\section*{Problem List}\label{sec:toc}

\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:eq}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:2dwell}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:B}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:shrink}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:crash}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:vel}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:cons}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:fict}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:dt}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:weeble}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:nonlin}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:morse}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:gaussian}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:qE}}
\item {\bl \ref{itm:V}}
\end{enumerate}

These problems are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Please share and/or modify.

\newpage

\begin{enumerate}

\item {\bl Drawing equipotentials}\namedlabel{itm:eq}{Drawing equipotentials}

\adapted{Ambrose \& Wittmann, {\it Intermediate Mechanics Tutorial}\\
		Available at: \url{http://perlnet.umaine.edu/imt/CFP/HWCFP.pdf}}

\given{Marino -- Fall 2011}

Two diagrams, each representing a force field in the x-y plane, are shown below.  

\begin{enumerate}
\item For each case, is it possible to draw a self-consistent set of equipotential contours for that situation?  

If so:	Draw a representative set of equipotential contours for that situation.  Each drawing should clearly show (1) the correct shape of the contour lines, (2) the correct relative spacing of the contours, and (3) label the regions that correspond to highest and lowest potential energy.  (You can draw right on the HW printout and staple it to your HW submission.)

If not:  Explain why, on the basis of the force field diagram, drawing such contours is impossible.

\item Are these forces conservative?  How can you tell?
\end{enumerate}

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{hw6_fig1.jpg}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{hw6_fig2.jpg}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\newpage	

\item {\bl Particle in a 2D well}\namedlabel{itm:2dwell}{Particle in a 2D well}

\given{Marino -- Fall 2011}

A particle is in a 2D potential of $U(\vec{r})=x^{2}+3y^{2}$.

\begin{enumerate}
\item (0.5 points) What is the force on the particle?
\item (0.5 points) Using the $\mathtt{ContourPlot}$ function in Mathematica, make an equipotential plot of  $U({\vec{r}})$ over the range $x=-1\rightarrow 1$ and $y=-1\rightarrow 1$.  (Be sure to attach your plot to this assignment.)   
\item (0.5 points) On your printed contour plot, draw an arrow at the point (0.5,0.5) in the direction that is approximately perpendicular to the equipotential contours at that location and points toward increasing potential.  Then evaluate your answer for part b at (0.5,0.5).  How does the direction of the force compare to the arrow that you just drew?

\end{enumerate}

\newpage

\item {\bl Computing line integrals of the magnetic field}\namedlabel{itm:B}{Computing line integrals of the magnetic field}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

The magnetic field inside a particular very long current carrying wire is given by $\vec{B}= -({B_0\over{R}} ) r \hat{\phi}$, where R is the radius of the wire, and r is the distance from the center of the wire.  Ampere's  law, discovered by Ampere in 1826, relates the integrated magnetic field around any closed loop to the total electric current passing through the loop, $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}= \mu_0 I_{through}$. If we want to determine the current passing through the loops shown in Fig.1, we need to evaluate the line integral of $\vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$.
 \begin{figure}[htc]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=4in]{Hom6fig1.eps}}\caption{}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Explicitly compute $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the full circle path of radius R, shown in Fig.1a. Use this to find $I_{through}$. (Briefly, discuss the physical meaning of  the sign of your answer).  (2 pts) 
\item Then, compute   $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the path of radius $r_0$ in Fig 1b.  How does $I_{thru}$ compare with part a? (2 pts) 
\item Compute   $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the quarter circle path in Fig 1c.
Compare your answers to the above three parts, and discuss. (What do you conclude  about how the current is distributed through the wire?) (2 pts) 
\item Sketch a vector plot of $\vec{B}= -({B_0\over{R}} ) r \hat{\phi}$. Rewrite $\vec B$ entirely in Cartesian coordinates, and then, use the command VectorPlot in Mathematica to generate a plot of $\vec{B}$ to check your hand-drawn sketch. (4 pts) 
\end{enumerate}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

The magnetic field inside a long current carrying wire is $\vec{B}=({B_0\over{R}} ) r \hat{\phi}$, where R is the radius of the wire, and r is the distance from the center of the wire.  Ampere's  law relates the integrated magnetic field around any closed loop to the total current passing through the loop, $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}= \mu_0 I_{through}$. If we want to determine the current passing through the loops shown in Fig.1, we need to evaluate the line integral of $\vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$.
 \begin{figure}[htc]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=4.4in,clip,trim=20mm 90mm 20mm 30mm]{Hom6_Bfields.pdf}}\caption{}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Explicitly compute $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the full circle path of radius R, shown in Fig.1a. Use this to find $I_{through}$. Briefly, discuss the physical meaning of  the sign of your answer. If I had asked you to integrate the other way around the circle,  what sign(s) in your solution would have changed? Would your final conclusion regarding the direction of ``I" have changed? Be clear about this - what does the sign of your integral tell you?  
\item Compute   $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the path of radius $r_0$ (less than R) in Fig 1b.  How does $I_{thru}$ compare with part a?
Compute   $\oint \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{r}$ along the quarter circle path in Fig 1c.
Compare all your answers for question, and discuss - what do you conclude  about how the current is distributed through the wire? 
%\item Sketch a vector plot of $\vec{B}= -({B_0\over{R}} ) r \hat{\phi}$. Rewrite $\vec B$ entirely in Cartesian coordinates, and then, use the command VectorPlot in Mathematica to generate a plot of $\vec{B}$ to check your hand-drawn sketch. (4 pts) 
\item Line integral practice! Do Boas Ch 6, section 8, problem \#6 (p. 307) {\bf Just pick one part - a, b, {\it or} c}.  How can you prove that the answer will come out the same for the other parts {\it without} doing them? 
\end{enumerate}

\newpage

\item {\bl Shrinking an orbit}\namedlabel{itm:shrink}{Shrinking an orbit}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

A puck (mass $m$) on a frictionless air hockey table   is attached to a cord passing through a hole in the surface as in the figure.  The puck is moving in a circle of radius $r_i$ with angular velocity $\omega_i$. The cord is then slowly pulled from below, shortening the radius to $r_f$ (r-final)
\begin{enumerate}
\item What is angular velocity of the puck when the radius is $r_f$? (2 pts) 

\item  Assuming that  the string is pulled so slowly that we can approximate the puck's path  by a circle of slowly shrinking  radius, calculate the work done  in moving the puck from $r_0$ to $r$.  (Look back at Taylor Eq 1.48. ``Slowly" means that $\dot r$ is tiny, as is the angular acceleration, so only the centripetal force will be important).  Compare your answer  with the puck's gain in kinetic energy, and comment briefly.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[htc]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Hom6figu.eps}}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\item {\bl You're a collision investigator!}\namedlabel{itm:crash}{You're a collision investigator!}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}


A driver traveling downhill in a 1200 kg SUV on a road with a 4.5 degree slope slams on his
brakes and skids 30 m before hitting a parked car. An insurance investigator
hires an expert who measures the coefficient of kinetic friction between the
tires and road to be $\mu_k = 0.45$. Is the investigator correct to accuse the driver
of traveling faster than the 25 MPH speed limit? Explain. (While there are
many ways to solve this problem, please solve it using work and energy.)\\

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

A driver traveling {\it downhill} slams on the
brakes and skids 40 m on before hitting a parked car. You have been hired as a physics expert to help the insurance investigators decide if the driver had been traveling faster than the 25 MPH speed limit at the start of this event.  The slope of the hill is 5 degrees.   Assuming braking friction has the usual form $\mu N$, what is the ``critical value" of $\mu$ for which you would conclude the driver was speeding? %Is this a lower or upper bound for $\mu$? 
Can you convince the investigators this driver was speeding, or do you need more information? (Do you need to know the mass of either vehicle? Road conditions?)   While there are
multiple ways to solve this problem, {\it please solve it using  work and energy}

\newpage

\item {\bl Choose an initial velocity}\namedlabel{itm:vel}{Choose an initial velocity}

\adapted{Ambrose \& Wittmann, {\it Intermediate Mechanics Tutorial}\\
		Available at: \url{http://perlnet.umaine.edu/imt/CFP/ExamsCFP.doc}}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011, Spring 2012}

The diagram below shows a region of space. The dashed curves indicate  positions of equal potential and are labeled with the value of the potential at that curve. Three vectors originating from point Y are also shown in blue. The vector B points directly from point Y to Z. In order to a particle to be launch from Y and reach  Z, which vector represents best the initial velocity? Explain your reasoning.  Then, make a (very crude, no calculations required!) sketch/guess of the {\it path} you expect the particle to follow if launched from point Y with initial {\bf v} given by vector A. ( Explain your reasoning, briefly, so we know what you were thinking about)  
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=2.4in]{Hom7fig1.pdf}}
\end{center}



\newpage

\item {\bl Properties of conservative fields}\namedlabel{itm:cons}{Properties of conservative fields}

\adapted{Ambrose \& Wittmann, {\it Intermediate Mechanics Tutorial}\\
		Available at: \url{http://perlnet.umaine.edu/imt/CFP/ExamsCFP.doc}}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011, Spring 2012}

Each diagram in the figure below depicts a force field in a region of space. 
\begin{enumerate}
\item For which force fields  can you identify a closed path over which  $\oint \vec{F}\cdot d\vec{l}\neq 0$? For each such case, clearly indicate an appropriate path on the diagram.
\item For each case indicate if $\nabla \times \vec{F}=0$ everywhere in the box? Also, for each case, could the force  depicted in the diagram  be conservative? Briefly, explain.  
\item For each case, is it possible to draw a self-consistent set of
equipotential contours for that situation? If so: Draw them! (Each drawing should clearly show the correct shape of the contour lines,
 the correct relative spacing of the contours, and label the regions that
correspond to highest and lowest potential energy) If not: Explain why drawing such contours is impossible.
\end{enumerate}

\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{Hom7fig2.pdf}}%\caption{}
\end{center}
 


\newpage

\item {\bl Fictitious potential energy of a satellite}\namedlabel{itm:fict}{Fictitious potential energy of a satellite}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

 Consider the following expression for the potential energy of a satellite in a far away
solar system.
\begin{equation}
U(x,y,z) =2 x^2-y^2 -xy +3 z
\end{equation}


\begin{enumerate}
\item Compare the magnitude of the force on the satellite at point 1 (0,0,1)
and point 2 (1,2,0).
\item Is this a conservative force? Clearly justify your answer.


\item For a arbitrary scalar function f(x, y, z), evaluate the components of
$\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{\nabla} f$ in Cartesian coordinates and show that the result is 0. Does this formal result relate to part b? (If not, why not? If so, briefly comment) 

{\it Extra credit!}  Explicitly compute the work done by this force as you follow a path from the origin (0,0,0)  to point 2, along a straight line. Then, check your answer very simply using the potential function given. Explain the idea of your check. 
 
\end{enumerate}

\newpage

\item {\bl Time derivative of the total energy of a pendulum}\namedlabel{itm:dt}{Time derivative of the total energy of a pendulum}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

 Imagine a simple pendulum consisting on a point mass $m$ fixed  to the end of a massless rod (length $l$), whose other end is pivoted from the ceiling to let it swing freely in the vertical plane. The pendulum's position can be identified  by its angle  $\phi$ from the equilibrium position.
\begin{enumerate}
\item  Write the equation of motion  for $\phi$ using Newton's second law
\item Show that the pendulum's potential energy  (measured from the equilibrium level ) is
$ U(\phi)=A (1-\cos \phi)$. Find A in terms of $m$, $g$ and $l$.
\item Write down the total energy as a function of $\phi$ and $\dot{\phi}$.
\item Show that by differentiating the energy respect to $t$ you can recover  the equation of motion you found in (a).  (What basic principle of physics are you using, here?) 
\item Assuming that the angle $\phi$ remains small throughout  the motion, solve for $\phi(t)$ and show that the motion is periodic. What is the period of oscillation?
\end{enumerate}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

A simple pendulum consists of  a point mass $m$ fixed  to the end of a massless rod (length $l$), whose other end is pivoted from the ceiling to let it swing freely in the vertical plane. The pendulum's position can be identified simply by its angle  $\phi$ from the equilibrium position.
\begin{enumerate}
\item  Write the equation of motion  for $\phi$ using Newton's second law.  Assuming that the angle $\phi$ remains small throughout  the motion, solve for $\phi(t)$ and show that the motion is periodic. What is the period of oscillation?
\item Show that the pendulum's potential energy  (measured from the equilibrium level ) is
$ U(\phi)=A (1-\cos \phi)$. Find A in terms of $m$, $g$ and $l$. Then,  write down a formula for the {\it total energy} as a function of $\phi$ and $\dot{\phi}$.
\item Show that by differentiating the energy with respect to $t$ you can recover  the equation of motion you found in (a).  (What basic principle of physics are you using, here?) 
\item Picking simple values for parameters (e.g, $m=l=1, g=10$), use your favorite computational environment (e.g., NDSolve in Mathematica) to solve for $\phi(t)$ given a fairly small starting angle $\phi_0$. Provide output that clearly shows that the period of oscillation is very close to the theoretical prediction from part d. Repeat with $\phi_0=2$ rad (which is quite large), and show that the period now deviates from ideal.  (Does the period get {\it larger} or {\it smaller} as $\phi_0$ increases?) 
\item Using your numerical solution to part (d) and your formulas for energy from part (b), generate a single plot which graphs KE, U, and total E as a function of time, for one period, in the case where $\phi_0=2$ rad is NOT small. Briefly, comment! (Do we still conserve energy when we cannot use the small angle approximation any more?)  
\end{enumerate}

\newpage

\item {\bl Stability of the weeble}\namedlabel{itm:weeble}{Stability of the weeble}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011, Spring 2012}

Look at the figure below, which shows a possible design for a child's toy.  The designer (you!) wants to build a ``weeble'' (which wobbles, but doesn't fall down). It is a single, solid object, the base shape is a perfect hemisphere (radius R) on the bottom, connected to the rest of the body (here, a penguin). The CM is shown, it is ``a'' above the base. You don't need to try to compute ``a", assume it is a given quantity! (As the designer, how might you control/change the position of a?)
\begin{enumerate}
\item Write down the gravitational potential energy when the weeble is tipped an angle $\theta$ from the vertical, as a function of given quantities (m, a, R, g, and of course $\theta$).
%For that you need to find the position of the center of mass as a function of $\theta$.

%It might help to think about the height of the hemisphere's center O as the toy tilts.
\item  Assuming the toy is released from rest, determine the condition(s) for any equilibrium point(s).   Then consider stability: what values of (or relations between) ``a" or ``R" ensure that the weeble doesn't fall down? Explain. Can this toy work as desired?
\end{enumerate}

\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=3.5in,clip,trim=15mm 15mm 20mm 20mm]{Hom8fig1a.pdf}}
\end{center}

\newpage

\item {\bl A simple 1D nonlinear force}\namedlabel{itm:nonlin}{A simple 1D nonlinear force}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

  A particle is under the influence of a force $\vec{F}=k^2( -x+ x^3/\alpha^2) \hat{x}$, where $k$ and $\alpha$ are constants.
\begin{enumerate}
\item What are the units of $k$ and $\alpha$? Now,  determine $U(x)$ assuming $U(0)=0$ and sketch it.  (Sketch means hand-drawn, not plotted with Mathematica. Include all features you consider interesting in your sketch, including e.g. zero crossings, behavior at large x, ``scales" of your axes, etc)
\item  Find the equilibrium points, if any, and determine if they are stable or unstable.
\item Qualitatively explain the motion  of an object  in this force field released from rest at  $x=\alpha/2$. Then, qualitatively explain the motion  of an object  in this force field released from rest at  $x=3\alpha/2$
\end{enumerate}
{\it This potential, or small variants of it, occurs in various physics situations. (This is a more accurate form of the true force on a pendulum  than our usual approximation, can you see why?) Another (famous!) case, albeit with signs flipped, gives  the ``Higgs potential" in particle physics, which is being actively investigated at CERN's  LHC collider.}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

A particle is under the influence of a force $\vec{F}=(-ax+ bx^3) \hat{x}$, where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
\begin{enumerate}
\item What are the units of $a$ and $b$? Assuming a and b are positive, find $U(x)$ (assuming $U(0)=0$) and sketch it.  (Sketch means hand-drawn, not plotted with Mathematica. Include all features you consider interesting in your sketch, including e.g. zero crossings, behavior at large x, ``scales" of your axes, etc)
\item  Find all equilibrium points and determine if they are stable or unstable.
\item Qualitatively describe the motion  of an object  in this force field released from rest at  $x=(1/2) \sqrt{a/b}$. 

Then, qualitatively describe the motion  of an object  in this force field released from rest at  $x=\sqrt{2a/b}$.
\item  Now suppose a and b are both negative.  Repeat parts b and c, commenting on what has changed. 
\item Setting a=b=-1 (with appropriate units), Taylor expand the  potential of part d {\it around the outermost stable equilibrium point} (not around x=0!!) Truncate your series after the first ``nontrivial" term. Plot the resulting approximate potential that a particle near that point feels, on top of the ``real" potential.   (Note this time I ask you to ``plot", not ``sketch", so use a computer) Use your plot to help you discuss the range of x for which you think this approximation would be reasonable.

 %{\it (Hint: the  ``Series" command in Mathematica can generate the Taylor series expansion for you, feel free to use it for this part. ) }


\end{enumerate}

{\it Note that this potential, or small variants of it, occurs in various physics situations. This is a more accurate form of the true force on a pendulum  than our usual approximation, can you see why? Part d is the (famous!) case of the ``Higgs potential" in particle physics, which is being actively investigated at CERN's  LHC collider.}

\newpage

\item {\bl The Morse potential}\namedlabel{itm:morse}{The Morse potential}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2011}

The potential energy of two atoms in a molecule can sometimes be approximated by the Morse function, 
$$ U(r) = A\left[ \left(e^{(R-r)/S}-1\right)^{2} -1\right] $$
where $r$ is the distance between the two atoms and $A,R,$ and $S$ are positive constants with $S \ll R$.  
\begin{enumerate}
\item (4 pts) Sketch the function for $0<r< \infty$ (or plot in Mathematica if you prefer).  
\item (2 pts) Show that  the equilibrium separation $r_{0}$ at which $U(r)$ is a minimum is given by $r_0=R$. 
\item (2 pts) Based just on your figure/sketch, what behavior do you expect for the system if it starts with no kinetic energy, but at some $r$ close to $r_{0}$?   Describe what this would mean physically for the two atoms in the molecule (i.e. tell the story of what is happening to them).
\item (4 pts)  {\it If our diatomic molecule has one very heavy atom, that atom can be viewed as effectively fixed at the origin, and this U(r) simply describes the potential energy of the second, lighter atom (mass m, a distance r(t)  from the origin.)} 

Approximate $U(r)$ for $r$ close to $r_{0}$. Use this approximation of $U(r)$ to get a differential equation for $r(t)$.  Can you tell from this differential equation if your prediction in part (c) was correct?  Explain.
\end{enumerate}

\newpage

\item {\bl A Gaussian well}\namedlabel{itm:gaussian}{A Gaussian well}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

A particle (in 2D) has a potential energy function given by $U(\vec{r}) = - e^{-(x^2+2y^2)}$.  (Assume all the numerical constants have implicit correct SI metric units so that x and y are in meters, and U in Joules) 
\begin{enumerate}
\item Using your favorite computational tool, make an equipotential plot (``ContourPlot[ ]" in Mathematica. Use the built in help to find out the syntax and arguments, it's pretty simple) and a 3D plot (``Plot3D" in Mathematica). Include a copy of both plots with your homework. Now stare at these images.  Describe in words how you would interpret this potential physically (For instance - is this attractive, repulsive, both, neither?    Can you invent some physical system for which this might be a crude model? Would a  particle be ``bound" here?) Which is more informative for you -  the countour plot or the 3D plot? Why?  If you put a particle at, say, ${\vec r = (1,1)}$, use your intuition and the plots to describe very clearly in words (without calculation) the approximate direction of the force there. 
\item Analytically compute the force on the particle. Then, use a computational tool to plot the force field (``VectorPlot[ ]" in Mathematica. If you name your plots ``p1 = ContourPlot[É]", p2=VectorPlot[É]" and make sure the x and y range is the same, then you can plot TWO different plots on top of each other using ``Show[p1,p2]".)  Produce a single plot that shows  the contours and the force field together. Now, what is the magnitude and direction of the force at (1,1)?  Discuss whether your plots agree with your expectation in part a (and resolve any discrepancies)
\item What changes could you make to $U(\vec{r})$ to make the potential well  i) centered at the point (1,1) instead of (0,0)     ii) stronger? iii) repulsive? (You might want to use your computational tool to visualize your claims here.) 
%What change would you have to make to have TWO attractive centers instead of one? Do that (picking the second center to be at (1,1), and plot the new force field. Is there anywhere (more than one place) in your plot where the force vanishes? (Briefly, discuss)  

\end{enumerate}


\newpage



\newpage

\item {\bl Electric force and potential energy}\namedlabel{itm:qE}{Electric force and potential energy}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

 Electrical force is given by $\vec F = q \vec E$, where $\vec E$ is the electric field. Electric force is conservative in ``electrostatic" situations (but is {\it not} conservative in all situations!) 


\begin{enumerate}
\item Consider a laboratory setup in which a charge q sits in a field $\vec E = (z^2+1) {\hat k}$.  Prove that the resulting force is conservative, and deduce a formula for the potential energy as a function of position of this charge

\item You release the charge (it has mass m) at the origin, starting from rest. Describe its motion qualitatively. How fast is it going when it reaches a distance h from the starting point? If the object was in the shape of a bead ({\it same} mass m and charge q) threaded on a curved, frictionless, rigid wire which started at the origin $(0,0,0)$  and ended at some point $(x_0,y_0,h)$  would it also have that same speed you just calculated, or not? (Why?) 
%% Comment for next time. It's ok, but perhaps making the field depend on x or y too would prevent this from being overly simple? 

\end{enumerate} 

\newpage

\item {\bl Electric potential and electric potential energy}\namedlabel{itm:V}{Electric potential and electric potential energy}

\given{Pollock -- Spring 2012}

 Electrical potential energy is given by $U = q V$, where $V$ is the voltage. Consider a charge q moving in a region of space where the voltage is approximated by the formula $V(x,y,z) =  c(2x  z +x^2) $ (Assume the constant c has appropriate units so U is in Joules when x,y, z are in meters) 
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Find the force on the charge q at the origin, and the point (1,1,1)
\item Does this situation produce a conservative electrical force? Clearly justify your answer.
\item For an arbitrary scalar function f(x, y, z), evaluate the components of
$\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{\nabla} f$ in Cartesian coordinates and show that the result is 0. Does the formal result relate to (b)? (If not, why not? If so, briefly comment) 

\item Explicitly compute the work done by the force in part a on a charge q as you follow a path from the origin (0,0,0)  to (1,1,1) along a direct, straight line path. Then, check your answer very simply using the potential function given. Explain the idea of your check. 
%% Comment for next time. I would like to make the starting point something other than 0,0,0 so they have to think about "subtracting the starting point". Maybe make the starting point (-1, -1, -1), so the straight path is still nontrivial (you must parametrize z(x) or x(z) to do the integrals - but those are easy enough!! 


\end{enumerate}
  
\end{enumerate}

\end{document}