Magnetic field of two current-carrying wires crossing over

AI Thread Summary
Two long current-carrying wires intersect at a 21° angle, with each carrying a current of 400 A. A wood mouse turns back at point P when the magnetic field strength reaches 6.8 mT, prompting a calculation to determine the distance x from the crossing point. Initial calculations using the magnetic field formula led to incorrect results, prompting a reevaluation of the contributions from both wires. The correct approach involves summing the magnetic fields from each wire, leading to a revised understanding of the distance x, which is approximately 12.91 cm. The discussion emphasizes the importance of considering both wires' contributions to the magnetic field when solving the problem.
ness87
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Two long current-carrying wires cross at an angle of 21° ("theta" is half of this) as shown in the figure above. The magnitude of the current is the same in each wire, I=400 A.

A wood mouse is running along the dashed line midway between the wires towards the point where the wires cross. The mouse turns back at point P, some distance x from the wire crossing point, because the magnetic field strength reaches an unbearable 6.8 mT. Determine the distance x (in cm).


Okay, so I assigned the dotted line perpendicular to one of the wires (in the triangle of interest in the diagram) as 'r' and...

I did:

B=(μ0/2pi) x I/r
so r =μ0/2pi x I/B
Therefore
r=(2x10^(-7) x 400)/6.8
Therefore r = 1.176x10^(-5)

Now using sine
sin(theta) = r/x
sin(10.5)=(1.176x10^(-5))/x
therefore x = (1.176x10^(-5))/(sin(10.5))
=6.45 x 10^(-5)
=0.0000645meters
=0.00645cm
or 6.45x10^(-3)cm

WHICH IS WRONG!
The weird thing is if i multiply that by two and move the decimal i have 12.9cm which is close to the correct answer of 12.91cm. Maybe I have stuffed up the formula or the units somewhere...

Also I'm aware the question is in millitesla so maybe i should have used 0.0068T in my first equation. However when I compute this I still get the wrong answer.

If you can help that would be great, I thought I was doing this the right way but maybe there is another way.
 

Attachments

  • Top.JPG
    Top.JPG
    38.8 KB · Views: 779
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi ness87. The distance from both wires at P are equal and the fields due to both are the sum of their individual fields. So the field would be B=2\frac{\mu_0I}{2{\pi}r}. Using B=6.8\times10^{-3} T also, gives you a factor of 2000 off from the answer
 
Ahhh! Fantastic, yes that makes sense to do twice the field strength because both fields contribute. Great!

Thank you very much sleepy time, much appreciated
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top