I Confusion regarding insulator and conductors

AI Thread Summary
In physics textbooks, terms like 'metallic' and 'metal' typically indicate that the material is a conductor. This understanding is crucial for solving problems involving electric fields, as demonstrated by a scenario where the electric field between two concentric hollow spheres is zero, relying on the properties of conductors. The assumption that 'metallic' implies conductivity is widely accepted. Therefore, when encountering such terminology, it is reasonable to treat the material as a conductor in problem-solving contexts. This clarity helps in accurately applying principles of electricity and magnetism.
chaos333
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
In textbooks, are words such as 'metallic', 'metal', etc indicating to the person doing the problem that the material in question is a conductor? This one problem said 'metallic' and the answers were as if it were a conductor with the electric field between 2 concentric hollow spheres being 0 and the outside of the entire thing just being dependent on the surface charge of the outer hollow sphere-- properties of a conductor.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
chaos333 said:
In textbooks, are words such as 'metallic', 'metal', etc indicating to the person doing the problem that the material in question is a conductor?
Yes. Metals are electrically conductive materials.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top