Am I On the Right Track? Assessing My Work and Doubts

  • Thread starter Thread starter matt222
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Works
matt222
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
I Have two set of Qs i worked throu. & i am not sure of my works
am i on the right tuck
 

Attachments

  • 1.doc
    1.doc
    24.5 KB · Views: 248
Physics news on Phys.org
matt222 said:
I Have two set of Qs i worked throu. & i am not sure of my works
am i on the right tuck
In #1, your comment (average flux) is not correct. It is not an average, it is a difference.

In #2, what is the basis of the equation you used for E?
 
So #1 is right, only the comment (average flux) is wronge??

in #2 i used farady's law( E 2pi r= -the rate of change of flux), for induced electric field:

E (2pi r)= -(pi R^2 dB/dt)/2r

E=1/2r* dB/dt *R^2

this is E
 
matt222 said:
So #1 is right, only the comment (average flux) is wronge??

in #2 i used farady's law( E 2pi r= -the rate of change of flux), for induced electric field:

E (2pi r)= -(pi R^2 dB/dt)/2r

E=1/2r* dB/dt *R^2

this is E
In #1 you also failed to include the number of turns of wire in the coil. Other than that it is good.

You need to take another look at Faraday's law. The flux involved is the flux through the closed path of the E•ds integral.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top