- #1

- 93

- 1

There is a problem, however, because the nonconducting part of the closed path does not have to be the shortest route between the wire ends. It can bow out (or in). In other words, it is arbitrary. So when does the emf appear?

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

In summary, the author argues that the emf in a closed path is not the result of a flux change, but is instead due to the changing magnetic flux linking the closed path.f

- #1

- 93

- 1

There is a problem, however, because the nonconducting part of the closed path does not have to be the shortest route between the wire ends. It can bow out (or in). In other words, it is arbitrary. So when does the emf appear?

- #2

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

There is a problem, however, because the nonconducting part of the closed path does not have to be the shortest route between the wire ends. It can bow out (or in). In other words, it is arbitrary. So when does the emf appear?

Welcome (back) to PF.

Is this question related to your old threads that were closed for cause?

Let us shed a little light on the subject by considering a case simpler than a coil, namely the Faraday Paradox. This employs two disks, say of the same size. One is made of copper and the other is a magnet with its faces the poles. These disks are arranged face to face, close but not touching. Each is mounted on an axle like a wheel and the axles are colinear. If the copper disk is spun while the magnet is stationary, a non-electrostatic emf appears between the copper disk's center and rim. If the magnet is spun and the copper disk remains stationary, there is no emf in the copper disk.

- #3

- 93

- 1

- #4

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

If you can post a compelling enough case for this new question, it should be allowed. Also, what is your background in E&M and using calculus to solve the differential equations involved in such problems? Thanks.

- #5

- 93

- 1

The new question is about an application of one of Maxwell's equations. The equation in question is related to Faraday's Law, being a special class of cases, but that is where the similarity ends.

I have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from the University of Michigan.

- #6

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

Falsely?The closed thread was about the fact that Faraday's Law falsely implies that a changing magnetic flux linking a circuit is responsible for the motional emf in some cases.

- #7

- 93

- 1

Yes. Motional emf is never the result of a flux change.

- #8

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Education Advisor

- 31,146

- 17,289

Which means you are in a position to overthrow all of physics? I'm not so sure I buy that.I have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from the University of Michigan.

I found your description impossible to fathom. It reminds me of the idea that the reason we haven't built a perpetual motion machine is that past attempts just weren't

There are three things you could be trying to do:

- Showing Maxwell's Equations do not match experiment. In this case, you need a real experiment, not a thought experiment.
- Showing Maxwell's Equations are inconsistent. Too late - they are known to be consistent.
- Trying to understand something you don't understand. Then show the simplest possible setup, perhaps with a drawing, in the words of Art Fleming "cast your response in the form of a question" and restrict yourself to physical measurements - i.e. "what will this ammeter read?"

- #9

- 93

- 1

Obviously, your level of understanding is not sufficient.

- #10

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

I updated the title to make it clearer that the motion is relative.By the way, the addition to my title, which I did not write, is wrong. There is no motion of the wire segment.

- #11

- 10,932

- 12,190

- #12

- 93

- 1

The wire segment does not move. How can I be any clearer?I updated the title to make it clearer that the motion is relative.

- #13

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

Relative to what? You have a BSEE from the U of M, so you know that there is no such thing as absolute motion. If the test coil and the toriod are moving relative to each other, that is what matters, no?The wire segment does not move. How can I be any clearer?

- #14

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

Yes. Motional emf is never the result of a flux change.

Obviously, your level of understanding is not sufficient.

Well, please state your question more clearly with an appropriate diagram. It sounds like it has something to do with a wire segment moving in relative fashion near a toroidally magnetized ferrite toriod. Can you please clarify exactly what the situation entails, and what your question is about? The more math and diagrams you can post, the better we can help you with this question.

- #15

- 93

- 1

When the magnet is situated so that the nonconductive part of the closed path passes through the hole in the magnet, the magnetic flux of the magnet links the closed path. When the magnet moves so that the portion of it that was inside the closed path crosses the closed path and ends up outside the closed path, there is no longer any flux linking the closed path. This should result in an emf in the closed path. The nonconductive portion of the closed path, however, is arbitrary. One cannot expect that the emf will appear when the magnet crosses a line that one has only imagined!

- #16

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

So, still without any diagram we are forced to try to guess and ask if we are guessing correctly. This is getting tiresome, and you are risking having yet another thread closed for cause.When the magnet is situated so that the nonconductive part of the closed path passes through the hole in the magnet, the magnetic flux of the magnet links the closed path. When the magnet moves so that the portion of it that was inside the closed path crosses the closed path and ends up outside the closed path, there is no longer any flux linking the closed path. This should result in an emf in the closed path. The nonconductive portion of the closed path, however, is arbitrary. One cannot expect that the emf will appear when the magnet crosses a line that one has only imagined!

So here's my guess -- your C-shaped wire segment with the open gap large enough to be slid over the toroid is moved from encircling the toriod body to a position away from the toroid and you are asking what the induced EMF is in that wire segment. Is that basically correct?

If so, you can model this wire segment as that conducting wire and a parasitic capacitor that is formed across the open "non-conducting" portion of that C-shaped wire segment. Do you understand how to calculate that parasitic capacitance and how to use that in your DE calculations of the voltage induced in the wire segment?

Last edited:

- #17

Mentor

- 34,458

- 12,430

With a good picture, for one. I don’t follow your description.The wire segment does not move. How can I be any clearer?

- #18

- 10,932

- 12,190

I am reasonably convinced that the setup is as follows. We have a small toroidal magnet (shown from the side as a red line). We have a piece of wire curved into a C shape (blue). We can always draw an infinite number of arbitrary imaginary lines that connect the ends of the wire and pass through the hole in the toroid (one such is shown as a fine green line).

The blue and green lines together form the perimeter of a surface ##\Sigma## through which one side of the magnet passes.

I think that the relevant analysis is this: we can always choose an arbitrary green line arbitrarily close to the edge of the magnet. Thus any motion of the magnet takes it outside this particular loop, meaning that ##\iint_\Sigma\frac\partial{\partial t}\vec B\cdot d\vec S\neq 0##. Thus by the integral form of Maxwell's third equation, ##\oint\vec E\cdot d\vec l## around the blue+green loop is also non zero for such a choice of green line, wherever the magnet is and whenever it is moved.

I also*think* that @MS La Moreaux thinks that ##\oint\vec E\cdot d\vec l## should be non zero for only one choice of green line, but doesn't know how to select the "correct one". If so, the resolution is to note that any choice of green line will do. If not, OP needs to provide a better description of the problem.

(It's telling that after 17 posts, 7 by the OP, in a thread about electromagnetism, I'm the first one using LaTeX.)

The blue and green lines together form the perimeter of a surface ##\Sigma## through which one side of the magnet passes.

I think that the relevant analysis is this: we can always choose an arbitrary green line arbitrarily close to the edge of the magnet. Thus any motion of the magnet takes it outside this particular loop, meaning that ##\iint_\Sigma\frac\partial{\partial t}\vec B\cdot d\vec S\neq 0##. Thus by the integral form of Maxwell's third equation, ##\oint\vec E\cdot d\vec l## around the blue+green loop is also non zero for such a choice of green line, wherever the magnet is and whenever it is moved.

I also

(It's telling that after 17 posts, 7 by the OP, in a thread about electromagnetism, I'm the first one using LaTeX.)

Last edited:

- #19

Mentor

- 34,458

- 12,430

And first with a picture(It's telling that after 17 posts, 7 by the OP, in a thread about electromagnetism, I'm the first one using LaTeX.)

- #20

- 10,932

- 12,190

Yeah, but that's already been pointed out several times. The lack of LaTeX was forcibly brought to my attention because I had to do the preview-then-refresh trick to get it to render.And first with a picture

OP - you are going to find it very difficult to communicate about physics if you refuse to use maths and diagrams.

Last edited:

- #21

- 93

- 1

The laboratory frame. No, relative motion is not what matters. Change ofRelative to what? You have a BSEE from the U of M, so you know that there is no such thing as absolute motion. If the test coil and the toriod are moving relative to each other, that is what matters, no?

Relative to the laboratory frame. Relative motion is not what counts. The Maxwell-Faraday Law does not address motion of the closed path.Relative to what? You have a BSEE from the U of M, so you know that there is no such thing as absolute motion. If the test coil and the toriod are moving relative to each other, that is what matters, no?

- #22

- 93

- 1

Thanks for the great diagram. You are thinking correctly. Upon further reflection, I was able to answer my question. There is an infinite number of simultaneous nonconductive portions of the closed path which includes the wire. As the magnet moves, it crosses one after another. Sometimes the emf will be in one direction and sometimes in the opposite direction. I suspect that they all cancel each other out and that there is no net emf in the wire.I am reasonably convinced that the setup is as follows. We have a small toroidal magnet (shown from the side as a red line). We have a piece of wire curved into a C shape (blue). We can always draw an infinite number of arbitrary imaginary lines that connect the ends of the wire and pass through the hole in the toroid (one such is shown as a fine green line).

View attachment 313236

The blue and green lines together form the perimeter of a surface ##\Sigma## through which one side of the magnet passes.

I think that the relevant analysis is this: we can always choose an arbitrary green line arbitrarily close to the edge of the magnet. Thus any motion of the magnet takes it outside this particular loop, meaning that ##\iint_\Sigma\frac\partial{\partial t}\vec B\cdot d\vec S\neq 0##. Thus by the integral form of Maxwell's third equation, ##\oint\vec E\cdot d\vec l## around the blue+green loop is also non zero for such a choice of green line, wherever the magnet is and whenever it is moved.

I alsothinkthat @MS La Moreaux thinks that ##\oint\vec E\cdot d\vec l## should be non zero for only one choice of green line, but doesn't know how to select the "correct one". If so, the resolution is to note that any choice of green line will do. If not, OP needs to provide a better description of the problem.

(It's telling that after 17 posts, 7 by the OP, in a thread about electromagnetism, I'm the first one using LaTeX.)

- #23

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

Did you understand my comments about the parasitic capacitance? It is not some imaginary thing that varies with the path chosen. It is a real thing that is integrated over all of the paths between the two ends of your C-shaped wire...Sometimes the emf will be in one direction and sometimes in the opposite direction. I suspect that they all cancel each other out and that there is no net emf in the wire.

Seriously?Relative to the laboratory frame. Relative motion is not what counts.

- #24

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Education Advisor

- 31,146

- 17,289

I suspect

What we seem to have is a calculation that you didn't do but are guessing at the answer doesn't agree with your intuition of what the answer should be.

- #25

- 93

- 1

I was not asking what the induced emf was.So, still without any diagram we are forced to try to guess and ask if we are guessing correctly. This is getting tiresome, and you are risking having yet another thread closed for cause.

So here's my guess -- your C-shaped wire segment with the open gap large enough to be slid over the toroid is moved from encircling the toriod body to a position away from the toroid and you are asking what the induced EMF is in that wire segment. Is that basically correct?

If so, you can model this wire segment as that conducting wire and a parasitic capacitor that is formed across the open "non-conducting" portion of that C-shaped wire segment. Do you understand how to calculate that parasitic capacitance and how to use that in your DE calculations of the voltage induced in the wire segment?

- #26

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

I was not asking what the induced emf was.

Yes. Motional emf is never the result of a flux change.

I'm getting dizzy...Sometimes the emf will be in one direction and sometimes in the opposite direction. I suspect that they all cancel each other out and that there is no net emf in the wire.

- #27

Mentor

- 65,523

- 17,326

BTW, since you are an EE, you do understand how a ferrous core transformer works, right? Is a permanently magnetized toroidal magnet any more "stealthy" than a toroidal core that has a primary coil with a DC current flowing through it?The wire is threaded through a toroidal permanent magnet, magnetized around the toroid (what I call a stealth magnet).

Last edited:

- #28

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Education Advisor

- 31,146

- 17,289

"Stealth toroid" is an anagram for "It's tool hatred".

Share:

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 143

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 499

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 14

- Views
- 669

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 560

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 850

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 757

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 232

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 965

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 1K