Faradays rotating disk paradox

In summary, a rotating disk with a magnet will induce a current if the rim contact is stationary. However, the field may remain stationary even if the disk is rotated, depending on the interpretation.
  • #1
arul_k
95
1
Hello,
I was reading about Faradays rotating disk paradox wherein when both the copper disk and magnet are rotated together an eddy current is induced along the radius of the copper disk. My question is if a maganitized steel disk (with one side being the N pole and the other side being the S pole) is rotated on its axis would a current be induced along its radius just as it is induced in the copper disk mentioned above?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This an interesting and important question in the generation of potentials and currents in moving conducting objects in magnetic fields. First, if a conducting disk freely rotates about an axis parallel to a uniform magnetic field, there is a radial electric potential (but no current) induced in the conducting disk. The disk rotates without eddy current generation, and no eddy current losses. But if an external stationary electric circuit is completed between the axle and outer rim of the rotating disk, then there is a current. Homopolar generators are based on this effect. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator
This not specifically an "eddy current" in a spacially varying magnetic field, but the radial Lorentz force F = q(v x B) produced by an azimuthally moving conductor in an axial magnetic field.
In the situation proposed in the OP, the disk is both magnetized and rotating. There is a current, as long as the rim contact is stationary.
 
  • #3
arul_k said:
Hello,
I was reading about Faradays rotating disk paradox wherein when both the copper disk and magnet are rotated together an eddy current is induced along the radius of the copper disk.
This is a confusing illusion. The field lines of the magnet, which curl around in space to the back end of the magnet, are rotating with the magnet and inducing current in the wire that's being used to contact the rotating disk. There is no current actually being induced in the rotating disk, just in the stationary wire.
 
  • #4
Thanks for the replies.


In the situation proposed in the OP, the disk is both magnetized and rotating. There is a current, as long as the rim contact is stationary
.

So I presume this current could be measured with a galvanometer. Do you know if this has been experimentally verified?


This is a confusing illusion. The field lines of the magnet, which curl around in space to the back end of the magnet, are rotating with the magnet and inducing current in the wire that's being used to contact the rotating disk. There is no current actually being induced in the rotating disk, just in the stationary wire.

But there is also the opnion that the field is independent of the magnet and remains stationary. I guess that's why it remains a paradox. Considering that the field has no mass or matter how exactly would you define the "rotation" of a uniform field ie what is it that is actually rotating?
 
  • #5
arul_k said:
But there is also the opnion that the field is independent of the magnet and remains stationary. I guess that's why it remains a paradox.
The illusion the field remains stationary comes from the assumption the current is induced in the disk. Once you realize the current is induced in the wire the paradox disappears.
Considering that the field has no mass or matter how exactly would you define the "rotation" of a uniform field ie what is it that is actually rotating?
How is the same problem solved for "translation" of the field when a magnet is moved in and out of a coil?
 
  • #6
zoobyshoe said:
How is the same problem solved for "translation" of the field when a magnet is moved in and out of a coil?
The misconception here I think is that the voltage and current (when there is a rim contact) is based on the Faraday induction principle. It is not. This is actually based on the Lorentz force principle, which does not require a time derivative (e.g., dB/dt). It requires a velocity perpendicular to the B field. A suble clue is that the polarity of the voltage (and direction of the current) does not change when the direction of rotation of the disk is reversed. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator
 
  • #7
Bob S said:
The misconception here I think is that the voltage and current (when there is a rim contact) is based on the Faraday induction principle. It is not. This is actually based on the Lorentz force principle, which does not require a time derivative (e.g., dB/dt). It requires a velocity perpendicular to the B field. A suble clue is that the polarity of the voltage (and direction of the current) does not change when the direction of rotation of the disk is reversed. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator
That wikipedia article references the DePalma N-Machine:

* Barlow's Wheel
* Electric generator
* Electric motor
* List of homopolar generator patents
* Homopolar motor
* Bruce De Palma
* Faraday paradox
* Faraday's law of induction

and:

Thomas Valone, The Homopolar Handbook : A Definitive Guide to Faraday Disk and N-Machine Technologies. Washington, DC, U.S.A.: Integrity Research Institute, 2001. ISBN 0-9641070-1-5

The N-Machine is a "free energy" device, i.e. crackpot technology:

http://antigravitypower.tripod.com/FreeEnergy/depalma.html

That wiki article is completely untrustworthy.
 
  • #8
zoobyshoe said:
That wikipedia article references the DePalma N-Machine:
and:
The N-Machine is a "free energy" device, i.e. crackpot technology:
http://antigravitypower.tripod.com/FreeEnergy/depalma.html
That wiki article is completely untrustworthy.
It is unfortunate that one reference in the Wiki article to the DePalma machine tainted the entire article. Here is another old paper on the Canberra accelerator project, including the homopolar generator:
http://physics.anu.edu.au/History/fire_in_the_belly/Fire_in_the_Belly03.pdf
which shows several photos of the Canberra homopolar generator with a man standing beside it (see page 30 of article (page 10 of pdf)). This unit generated over 2 million amps for pulses up to 10 seconds. Read article for details.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
The illusion the field remains stationary comes from the assumption the current is induced in the disk. Once you realize the current is induced in the wire the paradox disappears

How would you then explain the case where no current is generated in the disk when the magnet is rotated?

How is the same problem solved for "translation" of the field when a magnet is moved in and out of a coil?

Obviously any physical displacement of the magnet will cause the "magnetic effect" or field to move along with it. How ever that does not imply that the field rotates when the magnet is rotated about its polar axis.
 
  • #10
arul_k said:
How would you then explain the case where no current is generated in the disk when the magnet is rotated?
I assume you mean stationary disc, rotating magnet. The field lines emerge from the pole of the magnet, go through the disc, curl around, and come back and cut the wire going in the opposite direction. The direction of the current generated in the wire opposes the direction of the current generated in the disc and they cancel each other out.
 

1. What is Faraday's rotating disk paradox?

Faraday's rotating disk paradox is a thought experiment devised by the physicist Michael Faraday in the 1830s. It involves a rotating disk with a conducting rim placed in a magnetic field, which creates a current along the rim. The paradox arises when considering the direction of the current in relation to the rotation of the disk.

2. What is the paradox in this experiment?

The paradox lies in the fact that, according to Faraday's law of induction, a changing magnetic field should induce a current in a conductor in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field. However, in this experiment, the current is induced in a direction that is parallel to the magnetic field, rather than opposing it.

3. How does Faraday's paradox challenge traditional understanding of electromagnetism?

Faraday's paradox challenges the traditional understanding of electromagnetism because it suggests that the direction of the induced current is not solely dependent on the change in the magnetic field, but also on the motion of the conductor. This contradicts the previously accepted notion that the direction of the induced current is solely determined by the change in the magnetic field.

4. What is the explanation for Faraday's rotating disk paradox?

The explanation for Faraday's rotating disk paradox lies in the concept of magnetic flux. The movement of the disk creates a changing magnetic flux through the disk, which induces a current. However, the direction of this current is not solely determined by the change in the magnetic field, but also by the motion of the disk itself. This is due to the Lorentz force, which causes charged particles to be deflected in a direction perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the direction of motion.

5. How has Faraday's rotating disk paradox been resolved?

Faraday's rotating disk paradox has been resolved by understanding the concept of magnetic flux and the Lorentz force. The direction of the induced current is now known to be dependent on both factors, leading to a better understanding of the principles of electromagnetism. Furthermore, further experiments and developments in the field of electromagnetism have helped to confirm and explain Faraday's paradox.

Similar threads

  • Electromagnetism
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
281
Replies
5
Views
875
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
873
  • Electromagnetism
2
Replies
47
Views
11K
Back
Top