# Explaining How Magnet Dropping Down a Copper Tube Conserves Energy

• Jon.Nevermind
In summary, the "magnet dropped down a copper tube" demo conserves energy by using the potential energy given to the magnet when it is lifted to a height as it falls through the copper tube. The natural laws of Ampere's and Lenz's create eddy currents, fields, and forces which slow down the magnet's descent, heat up the copper pipe, and impart some momentum to it. This is not "energy out of nowhere" as the initial potential energy of the magnet is being dispersed. Even with a superconducting magnet, the same result occurs. Analogies such as a koosh ball or a generator at Niagara Falls can help explain this concept to a layperson.
Jon.Nevermind
Help me explain how the "magnet dropped down a copper tube" demo conserves energy

I've tried explaining to this person that the potential energy you give a magnet when you do work against gravity to raise it up to the copper tube is all the energy it has to deal with, and once dropped down it, natural laws (Ampere's, Lenz's etc) governing the situation so happen to create a series of eddy currents, fields, and forces which oppose its descent. The magnet moves down the tube slower, heats up the pipe, and imparts some momentum to it as well. The heat cannot exceed the potential energy you give the magnet in the first place.

I tried thinking of the simplest analogy possible, and came up with: http://www.google.com/images?q=koos...source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=939" correctly sized and dropped down the tube would slow down, heat up, and impart some momentum to the tube, but we don't think it "creates energy" because...it's a koosh ball...and its tendrils are plainly visible.

He doesn't like this analogy because friction will eventually wear the koosh tendrils down, but "not so with a permanent magnet".

Now, I know exposing permanent magnets to opposing fields can (somewhat) disassociate electrons in its magnetic domains, but will performing the magnet drop/copper tube demo enough times analogously wear down the magnet? Or is this just not a good analogy in the first place?

If that's not a good analogy, most basically, there is a sum resistive force acting for the distance of a magnet's fall through a tube that doesn't exist with a normal ball.

How better do you explain to a layperson that it's not "energy out of nowhere"?

I'm trying to create the argument to show at the end "you can't get something from nothing; energy conservation works", so I don't want to use that as a supporting argument.

I know it sounds silly.

Anyone?

(Thank you whichever mod for placing this in a more appropriate forum)

Last edited by a moderator:

Well you could explain to them that its not 'energy out of nowhere'. As you said, you're using energy to lift the magnet to the height at which you are dropping it from. That is the energy that is being dispersed in the copper that is slowing the magnets descent. Not sure if there is a good analogy out there to explain this. I think you explained it pretty well.

@BillPrestonEsq:
(I thought so too! thanks)

You may be right about the analogy. I may have gotten myself in more trouble than necessary. Analogies are normally very useful...oh well.

So am I correct that an absurdly minute amount of energy may come from the demagnetization of the magnet while its exposed to opposing fields? Essentially harvesting a tiny tiny tiny tiny amount energy from the situation that ordered its structure in the first place?

I think it holds. And then it just becomes an order of magnitude problem; that the energy "extracted" from the magnet is peanuts (from a finite bag) compared to the work done against gravity.

The problem is that you can drop a superconducting magnet down the tube, one which cannot demagnetize, and you'll still get exactly the same result.

But the complaint is silly. It has nothing to do with the problem. Koosh ball analogy is qualitatively good. Actual drag forces are different, so numerically it will be different, but that's details.

It's not that it's demagnetizing the magnet, the magnet is inducing a voltage in the conductor. When you induce a voltage in a conductor it creates it's own magnetic field which is opposing the magnetic field of the magnet, slowing it's descent through the copper tube

@BillPrestonEsq:
Believe me, I get that part. My concern was if the analogy qualitatively (thank you K^2) holds, which it does, and his concern does miss the point.

However, I need to look up superconducting magnets now...

Last edited:

So am I correct that an absurdly minute amount of energy may come from the demagnetization of the magnet while its exposed to opposing fields? Essentially harvesting a tiny tiny tiny tiny amount energy from the situation that ordered its structure in the first place?

That's why I posted that, no big deal just wanted to clarify.

You might point out that the generator at niagara falls does the same thing only 1) they wrap the pipe all the way out to your house and connect it to a light bulb and 2) they help the magnet fall by using water to weigh it down.

If that doesn't take the magic out of it I don't know what will.

The energy is all coming from the potential energy of the magnet's height. The magnet inside the copper tube is not gaining as much kinetic energy because of the added losses. Maybe you could connect a voltmeter to the pipe to observe the change, but it might be too low to get a good measurement.

If anyone cares to know, I have convinced the opposing side that energy is conserved with this argument, so I call it a success.

Thanks for all your input and reinforcement.

## 1. How does dropping a magnet down a copper tube conserve energy?

When a magnet is dropped down a copper tube, it induces a current in the tube due to the changing magnetic field. This current creates an opposing magnetic field, which slows down the magnet's descent. As a result, the kinetic energy of the magnet is converted into electrical energy through electromagnetic induction, thereby conserving energy.

## 2. Is this phenomenon only observed with copper tubes?

No, this phenomenon, known as Lenz's Law, can be observed with any conductive material. However, copper is commonly used because it is highly conductive and minimizes energy loss due to resistance.

## 3. How is the energy conserved in this process?

The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another. In the case of a magnet dropping down a copper tube, the initial potential energy of the magnet is converted into kinetic energy as it falls. This kinetic energy is then converted into electrical energy through electromagnetic induction, ultimately conserving the overall energy in the system.

## 4. Does the mass of the magnet or the length of the tube affect the amount of energy conserved?

Yes, the mass of the magnet and the length of the tube can affect the amount of energy conserved. A heavier magnet or a longer tube will result in a greater amount of potential energy at the start of the experiment, which will then be converted into a greater amount of electrical energy by the end.

## 5. Can this phenomenon be used to generate electricity?

Yes, this phenomenon is the basis for the design of certain types of generators, such as Faraday's disk. By continuously moving a magnet through a copper coil, a current can be induced and electricity can be generated. However, this process is not very efficient and is typically only used in small-scale applications.

• Electromagnetism
Replies
29
Views
2K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
3
Views
1K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
2K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
4
Views
3K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
7
Views
2K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
27
Views
3K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
16K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
3
Views
930
• Other Physics Topics
Replies
20
Views
4K
• Electromagnetism
Replies
3
Views
17K