How Do Multiple Tubes Affect Induced Current in Lenz's Law?

AI Thread Summary
When a magnet falls through a conducting tube, it induces a current in the tube. Surrounding the tube with identical tubes and wrapping wire around them may shield the induced current, potentially reducing the effect on the coil. This setup could behave similarly to a thicker tube, where the shielding effect diminishes the induced current in the wire. The discussion raises questions about how this arrangement impacts the magnet's velocity as it falls. Overall, the interaction between the tubes and the induced currents is complex and warrants further exploration.
gildomar
Messages
98
Reaction score
2
Obviously if a magnet falls down a conducting tube, it induces a current in the tube. But what if you surrounded the tube with other identical tubes in parallel with the first one so that they're touching, and then wrapped wire around those other tubes? Would the current induced in the wrapped wire be of the same magnitude as the current induced in the central tube? Or would the induced current in the wire be as if the tubes weren't there, and the magnet was just falling down the solenoid of wire?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where is the difference between this setup and just a thicker tube?
 
You mean a single tube with an inner diameter the same as the inner tube, and an outer radius the same as the wrapped wire?
 
That's how I interpreted your description.

The tube will do a good job in shielding changes in field via the induced currents, so the effect on the coil could be small.
 
That may very well be an apt way of looking at it. And if that is the case, how would that affect the velocity of the magnet?
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top