Magnetic field at a point and differential i

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving a two-dimensional annulus with uniform charge distribution, which rotates around its center. Participants are tasked with calculating the differential current and the magnetic field at the center of the annulus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the calculation of the differential charge and current in the rotating annulus, questioning the assumptions behind the use of infinitesimals and the definitions of current. There is discussion about the relationship between charge, area, and current, as well as the implications of using differential quantities in calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications and insights into the calculations, particularly regarding the definition of current and the treatment of infinitesimals. There is an ongoing exploration of the correct approach to calculating the differential current and the magnetic field, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of calculus and physics definitions, particularly concerning the treatment of differential quantities and the assumptions made in the problem setup. The original poster expresses uncertainty about certain calculations and definitions, indicating a need for further clarification.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,932
Reaction score
283

Homework Statement


Consider a 2 dimensional annulus whose radii are a<b. Its total charge is Q and is uniformly distributed over all its surface. The annulus rotates around its center at an angular velocity w.
This situation is equivalent of having a set of annulus of width dr and radii r (a<r<b), each one with a current di.
1)Calculate di in function of r.
2)Calculate the magnetic field in the center of the annulus.


Homework Equations


None given.


The Attempt at a Solution


2) is easy once I have 1). I'd apply Ampere's law once I'd have calculated the total current generated by the rotating annulus.

So I'm stuck on part 1).
What I did : Q=\pi (b^2-a^2)\sigma, where \sigma is the charge density of the annulus.
Charge of differential annulus : q=2\pi r dr \sigma. (Though I don't know why it wouldn't be 2\pi ((r+dr)^2-r^2).)

v=\omega r,
The current of a differential annulus is i=\frac{dq}{dt}=\frac{2\pi r dr \sigma}{dt} but \frac{dr}{dt}=v. Hence i=2\pi r v \sigma.
Now I wonder, the i of a differential annulus is the "di" they're talking about?
Oh yes it is!
Well, I replace \sigma by \frac{Q}{\pi (b^2-a^2)} and I get di=\frac{2rvQ}{(b^2-a^2)}=\frac{2r^2 \omega Q}{(b^2-a^2)}.
Did I got it right?

2)I enclosed = \frac{(b^3-a^3)}{3}\cdot \frac{2 \omega Q}{b^2-a^2} of the entire annulus.
B\cdot 2\pi b=\mu _0 I_{\text{enclosed}}.
Have I done right this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fluidistic said:
Charge of differential annulus : q=2\pi r dr \sigma. (Though I don't know why it wouldn't be 2\pi ((r+dr)^2-r^2).)
Well, if, in the annulus, the radius were changing (from inner to outer) by some finite amount \Delta r, then it would be true that the area of the annulus was the difference between the areas of the outer and inner circles:

A = \pi[ (r + \Delta r)^2 - r^2 ]​

However, in this case we're talking about an infinitesimal change in the radius, i.e. it is really really really small. So small, in fact, that it is basically not a change at all. What I mean by this is that when we do the math, we try to have our cake and eat it too. We regard the fact that there are two circles as being evidence that there is some (really really) small area between them, yet we assume that the inner and outer radii are essentially the same. (Yes, this is a contradiction). At this point, the mathematicians cringe, because we have not made this idea of an "infinitesimal" (a.k.a. "differential") quantity very precise (i.e. we have not shown that its properties are mathematically well-defined). My understanding is that a lot more advanced work has to be done in order to come up with a precise definition. That's why calculus is not taught using this concept, instead relying upon the much more precise idea of a limit. The object "dr", we are told, is not meant to be regarded as a number, but rather just a very suggestive symbol/notation. Physicists, however, know that they can get away with treating differentials as though they were actual quantities and still get the right answer. :-p As a result, they have a tendency to abuse the notation. Given that we are doing so, how do we calculate the "infinitesimal" area of the annulus?

dA = \pi[ (r + dr)^2 - r^2 ] = \pi [ r^2 + 2rdr + (dr)^2 - r^2]

dA = \pi[2rdr + (dr)^2]​

Now, the reasoning is that if dr is really really small, then (dr)2 will be even smaller still, so much so that we can regard it as neglible. To use fancy terminology: we ignore any terms that are of second order in dr. Doing so, the result becomes:

dA = 2\pi rdr​

Conceptually, the way to think of this approximation is that the inner and outer radii are so similar, that the area of the annulus is the same as it would be if we just had a straight rectangular strip whose length was the same as the circumference and whose width was dr.

Another important thing that you should learn from this is that any time you have an equation involving these infinitesimal quantities, both sides of the equation should be infinitesimal. It doesn't make sense for an infinitesimal to be equated to some ordinary (finite) value. That's how you know that your equation for di is probably wrong. I'll get back to you in a sec explaining where I think you might have gone wrong in calculating it.
 
Last edited:
fluidistic said:
The current of a differential annulus is i=\frac{dq}{dt}=\frac{2\pi r dr \sigma}{dt}

Not quite. Current, is a flow of charge. More specifically, the current at a point in space is defined as follows: if I sit at that point in space and use a "charge-o-meter" (i.e. some sort of fictitious charge measuring device) to measure the total amount of charge that passes by me in one second, that is the current. In the case of the annulus, this is NOT dq, which is the total amount of charge present throughout the entire annulus.

To measure the current in this way, I'd have to sit at a point that is initially located within the annulus, and measure how much charge passes by me. Because the annulus is simply rotating about its centre, a point that is initially within the annulus will always lie within the annulus. Furthermore, if I wait long enough, eventually all of the charge within the annulus will pass by me. The time I have to wait is just the time it takes for the annulus to sweep past me once. The time it takes to sweep past me once is the time it takes to go through one full rotation, which is just the period of the rotation, T. So the current at any point within the annulus due to the rotational motion is just di = (total charge of annulus / rotation period of annulus).

di = \frac{dq}{T}​

Of course, the rotational period is just the reciprocal of the frequency:

T = \frac{1}{\nu} = \frac{2\pi}{2\pi \nu} = \frac{2\pi}{\omega}.​

That's a pretty big hint I just gave you. :wink:
 
Thank you very much cepheid. I completely missed the part of the period...

And to your first reply, it has been extremely helpful to me. I was wondering whether or not saying the parenthesis part "(Though I don't know why it wouldn't be 2\pi ((r+dr)^2-r^2) .)". I'm glad I did it, you've erased my doubt.
I'm thinking to print out this page :D.
Thanks a million!
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K