Can Magnets in Equilibrium Defy Energy Conservation Laws?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of three magnets in equilibrium, specifically how potential energy and friction interact when one magnet is moved closer to another. It argues that when the third magnet is brought near a fixed magnet, it should not return to its original position due to the stored potential energy, but it does, suggesting a flaw in the analysis of energy conservation. Participants debate whether the repulsive forces at play contradict the conservation of energy principles. The conversation highlights misunderstandings about magnet behavior and energy dynamics in such systems. Ultimately, the inquiry seeks clarification on energy conservation in magnetic interactions.
paras02
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
If three circular or ring type magnets are placed such tnat centeral magnet is having its center at origin and other two are placed at its aperture repeling each other but they are just at enough distance such that the whole system is in equillibrium, placed on surface having friction.
If i fix any of the two magnets i.e a centeral one and anyone of the above and try to move the third one closer to the second fixed magnet and , leave it, it gets back to its orignal position.
The energy i spent in bringing them together is stored as potential energy and some part of that energy is lost in form of heat so at that particular point when the third one is close to the second one the system was just having the potential energy stored in it which is to be spent against friction also so the third magnet must not return to its orignal position but it is returning to its orignal position due to repulsion .
So please explain the the conservation of energy in this case.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The analysis is flawed.
When you let go, the magnet does not return to it's equilibrium position - even in the absence of friction.

Where did you get this from?
 
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