What is the E-field through the rod?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aximwolf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E-field Rod
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the electric field within a moving rod in a uniform magnetic field. It is established that while the rod moves, it experiences forces on its charges due to the magnetic field, leading to a separation of charges: positive charges accumulate on one end and negative charges on the other. This charge separation creates an electric field directed from the positive to the negative end of the rod. The equilibrium reached results in the electric field being equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the magnetic force acting on the charges. Ultimately, the electric field within the rod is non-zero, contrary to the initial assumption that it would be zero.
aximwolf
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



What is the electric field within the rod? (See attached document for full question)


Homework Equations



emf = -d(phi)/dt= integral (E dot dl)

The Attempt at a Solution



The rod is moving within a uniform magnetic field. There is no change in flux through the rod and thus no current is induced because the law of induction says that a change in flux induces an electric current. Without a current no E-field is generated thus the E-field must be zero.

Is this correct?
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
aximwolf said:

Homework Statement



What is the electric field within the rod? (See attached document for full question)


Homework Equations



emf = -d(phi)/dt= integral (E dot dl)

The Attempt at a Solution



The rod is moving within a uniform magnetic field. There is no change in flux through the rod and thus no current is induced because the law of induction says that a change in flux induces an electric current. Without a current no E-field is generated thus the E-field must be zero.

Is this correct?

Not quite:

when you say "There is no change in flux through the rod and thus no current is induced because the law of induction says that a change in flux induces an electric current" you were referring to the law/rule that applies to loops/solenoids not simply wires

If a positive charge was to move through the magnetic field, in the direction the rod is traveling [up the page in the diagram] it would experience a force to the right.

As such, positive charges in the rod will experience a force towards the right of the rod, and negative charges will experience a force to the left. At first, any charge free to move will move in the appropriate direction. [in actuality only the negative charges (electrons) are likely to have a net flow]
After a short while [very short!] the right hand end of the rod will have a net positive charge, while the left hand end will be negative.
As such there will be an electric field to the left.
From this time on, the electric field will try to drive electric charge in one direction, while the electromagnetic effect will try to drive them in the other direction. Equilibrium will have been reached and there is no further electric current.

Peter

ps: if the electric field is actually in the opposite direction I wouldn't be surprised! [as I often get these explanation back to front!] If only they had defined positive and negative the other way round so that it was the positive bits that move in a wire!
 
It does not matter if positive or negative charges move in the rod.
Peter is right, you can take that both the positive ions and the free electrons move together with the road with speed v upward. The force acting in a magnetic field on a charged particle moving with velocity v is Fm=q vxB. (q is the charge and x means vector product.) Applying right hand rule, you can find the direction of the force: it points on the right in case of positive particles and on the left in case of the negative one. In any case, the right-hand side of the rode will became positive and the left-hand side negative. The magnetic force and the electric force are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction: qvxB-qE =0 so E=vxB, the direction of E does not depend on the sign of charge carriers.

ehild
 
Last edited:
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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