Understanding Non-Conservative Fields in Faraday's Law - Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter John94N
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of Faraday's law in the context of non-conservative fields and perfect conductors. It highlights the confusion surrounding voltage measurements in closed loops, especially when considering superconductors, which exhibit the Meissner effect that prevents magnetic flux penetration. The conversation clarifies that while a perfect conductor is an equipotential, it can still have induced currents that generate opposing magnetic fields, effectively canceling any external flux. The participants emphasize the importance of considering the total magnetic field in these scenarios, akin to electrostatic shielding. Overall, the thread provides insights into the complexities of electromagnetic theory as it relates to superconductivity and Faraday's law.
John94N
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
This has been bothering me for a while. Consider a varying magnetic flux through a closed loop. Faraday’s law says the integral of E around the loop is V. This seems to be OK if the loop itself is split and joined with some resistance and with a voltmeter we measure across the resistor. However, if the loop is now closed we are measuring across effectively a short circuit and the voltage must be zero or very low but in any case not the emf developed by the varying magnetic flux. It also seems to work if we measure halfway around the loop and then double the measurement but again doesn’t work going 359.99 degrees aroung the loop. Is there something I am missing here? Probably.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Good question. For most ordinary conducting loops, there actually is some nonzero resistance, so a voltage difference around the loop is permissible. However you're asking about a "perfect" conductor. How can can a perfect conductor, which is an equipotential, have a nonzero voltage difference when we go around the loop?

The answer is that truly perfect conductors, like superconductors, will not permit a magnetic flux to go through them. Strange as it may seem, it is experimentally verified. This is called the Meissner effect, and it explains why a permanent magnet cannot come in contact with a superconductor and instead floats above it.

One way to envision how this actually happens is that when a magnet is brought near the superconducting loop, the loop gets a current induced in it (for free) which causes a magnetic field exactly opposite to the one passing through it, canceling any flux.
 
Jolb, thanks for your response. i guess I was not considering the total B field in Faraday's law, that is the B field generated by the source and that generated by the ring itself.
Thanks John
 
John94N said:
Jolb, thanks for your response. i guess I was not considering the total B field in Faraday's law, that is the B field generated by the source and that generated by the ring itself.
Thanks John
Right. And as you note, it's not that either field is zero, only that the sum of the two fields is zero. It is similar to electrostatic shielding in which the external electric field is countered by the internal field, but only after and thanks to the displacement of charges ("equipotential" is simply the result).
 
Maybe this video will be helpful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for the responses. The videos from Dr Lewin's lecture really hurts my head, but they explain a lot. Thanks, John.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
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...
Back
Top