Question on simple static magnetics

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Magnetics Static
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of a closed loop carrying a constant current in a uniform magnetic field, specifically addressing the apparent contradiction between the net linear force being zero and the presence of torque on the loop. Participants explore the implications of these concepts in the context of magnetostatics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that while the total force on the loop is zero due to the closed nature of the loop, there are individual forces acting in different directions that lead to torque.
  • Others argue that the terminology used in textbooks can be misleading, as it may imply that there is no force when in fact there is a non-zero torque acting on the loop.
  • A participant emphasizes the distinction between linear force and angular force (torque), suggesting that the presence of torque is a result of the linear forces acting on different segments of the loop.
  • Some participants discuss the mathematical formulations for force and torque, highlighting that they involve different integrands and cannot be directly compared.
  • There is a concern expressed about the clarity of explanations in educational materials, with a participant suggesting that the book should address the relationship between linear force and torque more explicitly.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the theoretical aspects of the physics involved, specifically that a closed loop in a magnetic field experiences zero net linear force and non-zero torque. However, there is disagreement regarding the clarity and wording used in educational resources, which some find misleading.

Contextual Notes

Participants point out that the mathematical treatment of force and torque involves different integrals, which may not be immediately clear to students. The discussion highlights the importance of precise language in educational contexts to avoid confusion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and educators in physics, particularly those interested in magnetostatics and the nuances of force and torque in electromagnetic contexts.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
Suppose a closed loop with constant current around the loop. The loop is in a uniform constant B field. The force is

[tex]\vec F=I\left (\oint_c d\vec l\right ) \times \vec B.[/tex]

Being a closed loop [itex]\oint_c d\vec l=0[/itex]. So there is no force acting on the loop.

BUT at the same time, we know there is torque, so there is force! How is that possible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You calculate the total force, integrated over the ring. This is 0. But it consists of forces in different directions along the ring, which are not 0.

I can give you two apples, and then steal two apples from you. Your total number of apples is the same as before. But certainly your number of apples was not the same all the time.
 
I understand that, I can see the loop is going to turn as one side being push and the other side being pull and the total force cancel out. But isn't it quite dumb for the book to make a statement like this and the very next page start talking about torque?
 
yungman said:
I understand that, I can see the loop is going to turn as one side being push and the other side being pull and the total force cancel out. But isn't it quite dumb for the book to make a statement like this and the very next page start talking about torque?

You're comparing two different integrands though. For torque,

[tex]\mathbf{T} = I \oint \mathbf{r} \times \left( d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B} \right)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
By the word "force" we typically mean "linear force", as opposed to an "angular force" (torque). Yes, a single loop of current in a static uniform magnetic field experiences zero net linear force and a non-zero net angular force. That is why little electric motors spin instead of shoot out like a bullet.
 
Born2bwire said:
You're comparing two different integrands though. For torque,

[tex]\mathbf{T} = I \oint \mathbf{r} \times \left( d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B} \right)[/tex]

I know you use different formulas as torque require an arm to swing. But the circuit loop is the same.
 
chrisbaird said:
By the word "force" we typically mean "linear force", as opposed to an "angular force" (torque). Yes, a single loop of current in a static uniform magnetic field experiences zero net linear force and a non-zero net angular force. That is why little electric motors spin instead of shoot out like a bullet.

I understand this, just the idea is very misleading...at least to me. Angular force starts with linear force, difference is it is on a hinge and it is forced to turn.

Anyway, we all agree on the theory, I just complain about the book. It should say right away about the other possibility. Student read the first time will take it literal.
 
yungman said:
I know you use different formulas as torque require an arm to swing. But the circuit loop is the same.

No, that is the formula for the torque, they are not the same integrals. The infinitesimal force is on a wire in magnetostatics is

[tex]dF = I d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]

The infinitesimal torque is therefore,

[tex]d\mathbf{T} = I \mathbf{r}\times d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]

Since the position vector changes depending on where you are on your wire, you cannot take the position vector out of your integral. Hence,

[tex]\mathbf{T} = I \oint \mathbf{r}\times d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]
 
Born2bwire said:
No, that is the formula for the torque, they are not the same integrals. The infinitesimal force is on a wire in magnetostatics is

[tex]dF = I d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]

The infinitesimal torque is therefore,

[tex]d\mathbf{T} = I \mathbf{r}\times d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]

Since the position vector changes depending on where you are on your wire, you cannot take the position vector out of your integral. Hence,

[tex]\mathbf{T} = I \oint \mathbf{r}\times d\boldsymbol{\ell} \times \mathbf{B}[/tex]

I worded it wrong, I meant they both are of different formulas, one for torque and one for linear. There is not disagreement on the physics here, I just complain about the wording of the book. It's all English. If they want to say that, they should clarify more.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
472
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K