Calculate magnetic dipole of other planets relative to the Earth

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the magnetic dipole of various planets relative to Earth using specific equations. It addresses the correct application of solar wind density and the interpretation of the magnetic dipole moment (M) for Mercury, questioning whether to use Earth's value or a relative value from a provided table. Participants clarify that the factor of 1/r^2 is necessary under certain conditions and suggest expressing proton number density and mass density as functions of distance in astronomical units. Additionally, they emphasize using the magnetic moment from the table to derive the magnetic field at the surface of the planet without needing Earth's magnetic field value. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding relative values and proper application of formulas in planetary magnetic calculations.
Kovac
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
Thread moved from the technical forums to the schoolwork forums
3.PNG


So I have a few questions regarding the above task.

I will use this equation to get the results for the different planets:
eq.PNG


Questions:

  1. So in the equation density p= mass of proton x proton density of the solar wind x 1000 000 (conversion between kgcm^-3 to kgm^-3) x 1/r^2 (I assume that I should multiply this equation in here since it says that the solar wind density is decreasing with distance). Question: Is this correctly assumed?
  2. B = M/r^3 where M= magnetic dipole of the planet in question, r= radius of the planet in question. For radius I have a table with values, but for M Im having trouble interpreting what to write since it says "relative to earth".
    table.PNG
Question: What does the M value become for Mercury? Should I take Eart value * Mercury relative value? Or Is it simply 3.8 x 10^-4 or should I take the delta between earth value and the value for Mercury in the table? Its because it says relative to earth what confuses me, if you google the value for mercury its a lot bigger than the table is showing.μ0= 4pi x 10^-7 Vs/Am [magnetic permiability of free space], stays the same (not planet dependent)
u= solar wind velocity (not planet dependent). Will assume a value.
 

Attachments

  • 3.PNG
    3.PNG
    9.5 KB · Views: 101
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Kovac said:
  1. So in the equation density p= mass of proton x proton density of the solar wind x 1000 000 (conversion between kgcm^-3 to kgm^-3) x 1/r^2 (I assume that I should multiply this equation in here since it says that the solar wind density is decreasing with distance). Question: Is this correctly assumed?
Yes, the factor of ##1/r^2## should be there. [EDIT: Actually, you should NOT have the explicit factor of ##1/r^2##if your proton density already includes the ##1/r^2## behavior. Answering the questions below should help clarify this.]

You are given that the proton number density at ##r = 1## AU is ##10## cm-3. So, how would you express the proton number density as a function of ##r## where ##r## is in AU?

How would you express the mass density ##\rho## of protons as a function of ##r## for ##r## in AU?

Kovac said:
Question: What does the M value become for Mercury? Should I take Eart value * Mercury relative value? Or Is it simply 3.8 x 10^-4 or should I take the delta between earth value and the value for Mercury in the table? Its because it says relative to earth what confuses me, if you google the value for mercury its a lot bigger than the table is showing.

For the earth you have the equation
1696096200153.png

Presumably, ##B_E## is some sort of value of the earth's magnetic field at the earth's surface. Hopefully, you have a value for this. For a different planet, you will need to replace ##B_E## by the planet's surface magnetic field, ##B_{planet}##. Try to express ##B_{planet}## in terms of ##B_E## , the radii of the earth and the planet, and the magnetic dipole moments of the earth and the planet. This should allow you to find ##B_{planet}## in terms of ##B_E## and values in your table.

EDIT #2: I just noticed that your table in post #1 gives a value for the earth's magnetic moment at the bottom of the table. So, you can use the table to find the numerical value of the magnetic moment of the planet. Then you can find the magnetic field at the surface of the planet from the magnetic moment and the radius of the planet. So, you will not need to worry about a numerical value for the earth's field ##B_E##.
 
Last edited:
Even though B is usually used for magnetic field (in Tesla) here it designates the magnetic moment. And if you have the relative radius on the left hand size it should be relative moment on the right hand size.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetopause
 
nasu said:
Even though B is usually used for magnetic field (in Tesla) here it designates the magnetic moment. And if you have the relative radius on the left hand size it should be relative moment on the right hand size.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetopause
The link writes the magnetopause distance as $$r_{mp} \approx \sqrt[6]{\frac {2 B_0^2}{\mu_0 \rho v^2}}$$ where ##B_0## is the magnetic moment. (Not a great notation since the link also used ##B## for magnetic field.)

However, in this problem, the formula given is for the ratio of ##r_{mp}## to the earth's radius ##r_E##. So, using the formula from wikipedia, we have $$\frac{r_{mp}}{r_E} \approx \sqrt[6]{\frac {2 (B_0/r_E^3)^2}{\mu_0 \rho v^2}}$$ The quantity ##B_0/(r_E)^3## is the earth's magnetic field at the surface of the earth: ##B_E##. So, we get $$\frac{r_{mp}}{r_E} \approx \sqrt[6]{\frac {2 B_E^2}{\mu_0 \rho v^2}}$$ This agrees with the formula given in the first post except for numerical factors.
 
Kovac said:
Question: What does the M value become for Mercury?
This table of planetary moments (relative to Earth's) and magnetopause distances (in terms of planetary radii), from the Wikipedia entry that @TSny cited, should help answer some of your questions and serve as a check on your calculations:
1696102287833.png
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Back
Top