Ballistic Lenz's Law: Magnet Induced Current in Copper Tube

AI Thread Summary
A magnet moving rapidly towards a copper tube can induce a current strong enough to potentially melt or vaporize the tube, depending on the speed of the magnet. The term "fast enough" refers to a velocity that generates sufficient current to achieve this effect. If the copper tube is not securely held, it may be dragged along with the magnet, preventing it from melting immediately. Additionally, the tube could experience significant compression against its mountings, leading to heating through both compression and resistive (I2R) effects. Overall, the interaction between the magnet and the copper tube presents interesting physical phenomena worth exploring.
gildomar
Messages
98
Reaction score
2
If a magnet was going fast enough as it approached/entered a copper tube, could the current induced in the tube via Lenz's Law be high enough to melt or even vaporize the tube?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sounds like a cool experiment
 
Yes. Because “fast enough” must be interpreted as “fast enough to melt the tube”.
If the tube was not firmly held it might be dragged with the magnet before it could melt.
It is also possible that the copper tube would be pressed against it's solid mountings with sufficient force to heat the material by compression. The compressive and I2R effects would combine to melt the copper tube.
 
  • Like
Likes gildomar
Baluncore said:
Yes. Because “fast enough” must be interpreted as “fast enough to melt the tube”.
If the tube was not firmly held it might be dragged with the magnet before it could melt.
It is also possible that the copper tube would be pressed against it's solid mountings with sufficient force to heat the material by compression. The compressive and I2R effects would combine to melt the copper tube.

Good point; I hadn't considered about the tube possibly being dragged along, or the compression heating.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top