Correct statement regarding a conductor in a magnetic field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the force acting on protons and electrons in a magnetic field, particularly when applying Fleming's Left Hand Rule. Participants clarify that the Lorentz force acts upward on positive charge carriers, while negative charge carriers (electrons) move in the opposite direction, leading to a higher electron density at the bottom of the conductor. The book's answer is questioned, with suggestions that it may be incorrect, as the potential difference in a conductor should stabilize to zero once current flow ceases. The Hall effect is referenced as a relevant phenomenon that explains the charge distribution in the conductor. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of using vector products over hand rules for clarity in understanding electromagnetic forces.
songoku
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
391
Homework Statement
A stationary metal conductor is carrying a current
in the direction to the right in the plane of the
paper as shown. It is in a region of uniform
magnetic field pointing perpendicularly into the
plane of the page. Which of the following
statements is correct?
a. P has a lower potential than Q
b. P and Q are at the same potential
c. P is at a positive potential
d. P has a higher potential than Q

(diagram given below)
Relevant Equations
Fleming's Left Hand Rule
Untitled.png

By using Fleming's Left Hand Rule, I got the force acting on proton is directed upwards so my answer is (d) but the answer key is (a). So the force acting on proton is actually downwards?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
songoku said:
I got the force acting on proton is directed upwards
That is correct. The Lorentz force acts in the upward direction.

To speak of this in terms of potential is confusing and didactically unwise. It is unclear what the exercise composer means: book answer (a) hints at a fictitious potential acting on the moving charge carriers. But there is only the Lorentz force.

One can equally well claim that (b) is correct: in an ideal conductor the potential is the same everywhere.

It is not even clear where P and Q are located exactly: outside the conductor ? In that case your arguments are valid IMHO

Perhaps the book answer is simply wrong ?
 
  • Like
Likes songoku
BvU said:
That is correct. The Lorentz force acts in the upward direction.

To speak of this in terms of potential is confusing and didactically unwise. It is unclear what the exercise composer means: book answer (a) hints at a fictitious potential acting on the moving charge carriers. But there is only the Lorentz force.

One can equally well claim that (b) is correct: in an ideal conductor the potential is the same everywhere.

It is not even clear where P and Q are located exactly: outside the conductor ? In that case your arguments are valid IMHO

Perhaps the book answer is simply wrong ?

The explanation of the book: By Fleming’s Left Hand Rule, electrons will be deflected upwards
 
https://www.electrical4u.com/fleming-left-hand-rule-and-fleming-right-hand-rule/ says something about the force on the conductor, not necessarily about the force on the electrons (though I think in the end they are one and the same).
I find it confusing to use anything but right-hand rules.

The Lorentz force is ##\vec F = q(\vec E + \vec v\times\vec B)## and with current to the right, ##\vec v## is to the right for positive charge carriers, so ## \vec v\times\vec B## is upward.
If the protons (better to speak of positive charge carriers) would move, the force would be upward.

In a metal conductor, conductance is not through moving protons, but through moving electrons. Current to the right means electrons drifting to the left, so ## \vec v\times\vec B## is downward, but ## q\vec v\times\vec B## is upward.

Your exercise composer finds this upward force on the electrons causes a potential difference in the conductor. With negative charge buildup at the upper side P would be negative wrt Q.
 
  • Like
Likes songoku and berkeman
I believe the answer must be (b).

Yes, the current will be deflected upwards. And thus there will be more positive charge near the upper side of the conductor, and more negative charge on the lower side.

But it's still a conductor. Conductors cannot support a potential difference without current flow. So once the system has had a tiny bit of time to stabilize, the potential difference should be zero.

To put it another way, imagine we start the system with the wire carrying current with no external magnetic field. There would be no potential difference, clearly. Then we turn on the external magnetic field: a potential difference is generated by the Lorentz force which causes current to move upward, meaning that the top (P) is at a lower potential than the bottom (Q).

But the charge flows in response to that potential difference. It keeps flowing towards P until the potential difference is eliminated. Once the system stabilizes so that no more current is flowing towards/away from P/Q, it has to be at zero potential difference across the conductor.
 
  • Like
Likes songoku
I think the problem here is the definition of the electric potential. There will be a higher electron density at the top, leading to an electric field in the conductor - balancing the force from the magnetic field. Does that count as potential difference, if the electrons (on average) feel no force in this direction?

If the magnetic field is limited to the area of the conductor and you connect the opposite sides outside the magnetic field you get a current flow. Going by that definition there is a potential difference and (a) is the correct answer.
 
  • Like
Likes scottdave and songoku
but ## q\vec v\times\vec B## is upward.
Sorry I don't understand this part. I always think that if force on positive charge carriers is upwards, then force on negative charge carriers will be in opposite direction (downward)

mfb said:
There will be a higher electron density at the top
Why is electron density higher at the top? Using fleming's left hand rule, the force acting on negative charge carriers will be downward so electrons gather at the bottom part?

Thanks
 
songoku said:
Sorry I don't understand this part. I always think that if force on positive charge carriers is upwards, then force on negative charge carriers will be in opposite direction (downward)
The 'convention' for direction of current is the direction that positive charge carriers would move. So negative charge carriers move in the direction opposite to the direction of 'the current'.
In other words: electric current to the right means electrons drifting to the left.

Fleming's rule works for 'the current' in the sense of moving positive charge carriers.

Why is electron density higher at the top? Using fleming's left hand rule, the force acting on negative charge carriers will be downward so electrons gather at the bottom part?
Again, I advise to forget any and all hand rules, especially the left hand ones :smile: and work with vector products. A way to avoid hand rules (with their associated problem: which finger is assigned to what) is to think of the corkscrew: for ##\bf a \times b ## turn ##\bf a## over the smallest angle in the direction of ##\bf b## and the vector product points in the direction a corkscrew goes.
Admittedly the corkscrew rule is a right hand rule​
And to make things worse they invented left-hand corkscrews for left handeds, but fortunately they are extremely rare (those corkscrews, that is :cool: ).​
As Rudy (I find @rude man a contradiction :wink:) so correctly posts: check out the Hall effect.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes scottdave, vela and songoku
  • #10
I think I get it. Thank you very much for all the help
 
  • Like
Likes BvU
  • #11
BvU said:
Again, I advise to forget any and all hand rules, especially the left hand ones :smile: and work with vector products.
Agreed, in fact I usually forget about hands altogether. I set up a coordinate system and use the well-worn determinant to evaluate curl. For some reaon I have no problem figuring out the i x j = k, -i x j = -k etc. etc. sequences.
(I find @rude man a contradiction :wink:)
Thx - but where there's smoke ..." ::smile:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BvU
  • #12
I frankly don't understand the need for "Fleming's left hand rule". This is indeed the Hall effect, and everything is explained by the lorentz force law, which uses the standard right hand rule for all cross products of vectors. I think an extra rule for particular cases (such as the electron) only confuses the situation, and is not at all necessary.
 
  • Like
Likes Doc Al
Back
Top