Magnetic field Cancellation in AC wires (How?)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the confusion surrounding the cancellation of magnetic fields in AC wires. While the magnetic fields between the wires are in the same direction, they extend outward, creating regions above and below the wires where the fields are opposite and can effectively cancel. The proximity of the wires is crucial for minimizing the magnetic field away from them, as closer wires lead to better cancellation. Additionally, twisting the wires creates small loops that help further reduce the residual magnetic field. Overall, understanding the spatial arrangement and field behavior is key to grasping magnetic field cancellation in AC wiring.
HAgdn
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
How do magnetic fields cancel in AC wires? (common wire with hot and neutral)
Relevant Equations
This question has no involved equations
20200229_195207.jpg


Why do the magnetic fields in-between the wires does not seem to cancel? Even those outside each wire? (the fields do are not in opposite direction). Yet most of the people I have talked to until now says that such magnetic fields do cancel? I am confused...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this homework, or are you just asking?
 
Cutter Ketch said:
Is this homework, or are you just asking?
Just asking
 
Look at your sketch. Yes, the fields are the same direction between the wires, but the fields extend out further. The field below the top wire is into the board. A little lower and it is still into the board including the region below the bottom wire. So in the region above both wires and the region below both wires the fields are in opposite directions. If the wires are very close together, the fields are also essentially equal and cancel.

We don’t officially care about the region between the wires as nothing will be located between the wires. However, minimizing that space and putting the wires together is important for best cancellation of the field away from the wires. In fact you can relate the strength of the field away from the wires to the area of the loop made by the wires. As that area can never be exactly zero, we often further minimize the field by twisting the wires so that there are a series of tiny loops with the residual field pointing opposite directions from each loop.
 
  • Like
Likes HAgdn
:headbang:... so it's just a matter of having a larger view...
 
HAgdn said:
:headbang:... so it's just a matter of having a larger view...

Right. Actually, it’s much easier to see in cross section. Draw the field of each wire as an ever expanding set of concentric circles. The two sets of circles almost but don’t quite cancel everywhere
 
  • Like
Likes HAgdn
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top