- #1
giladsof
- 13
- 0
Which Way Is V? Understanding the Relationship Between Electricity and Magnetism
- Thread starter giladsof
- Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the induced current from the movement of a rod in a magnetic field, noting that the current is zero at equilibrium and often negligible otherwise. The primary consideration is the force exerted by the magnetic field on the rod due to the existing current, without needing to factor in induction. A dilemma arises regarding the direction of voltage (V), questioning whether it relates to the rod's movement or the current's movement. The application of the right-hand rule does not yield an upward force in either scenario presented. The conversation emphasizes the complexities of understanding the relationship between electricity and magnetism in this context.
- #2
ideasrule
Homework Helper
- 2,286
- 0
You're trying to calculate the current induced by the movement of the rod. That current is 0 when the rod is at equilibrium, because the rod wouldn't be moving. Even when it's not at equilibrium, the induced current is usually so small as to be negligible compared to the current supplied by the power source.
So you just need to consider the force applied by the magnetic field on the rod, due to the existing current I. There's no need to consider induction.
So you just need to consider the force applied by the magnetic field on the rod, due to the existing current I. There's no need to consider induction.
- #3
giladsof
- 13
- 0
OK... As I try your idea I get into the following dilemma: which way is V? The movement of the rod or the movement of the current?
Unfortunately neither one of those options creates a force upwards using the right hand rule... \:
Unfortunately neither one of those options creates a force upwards using the right hand rule... \:
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.)
I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Similar threads
Hot Threads
-
Sequential measurements in quantum mechanics
- Started by hmparticle9
- Replies: 27
- Advanced Physics Homework Help
-
Understanding the double square well potential
- Started by hmparticle9
- Replies: 16
- Advanced Physics Homework Help
-
Trajectory of a particle in polar coordinates
- Started by whatever itis
- Replies: 18
- Advanced Physics Homework Help
Recent Insights
-
Insights Thinking Outside The Box Versus Knowing What’s In The Box
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 3
- Other Physics Topics
-
Insights Why Entangled Photon-Polarization Qubits Violate Bell’s Inequality
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 28
- Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
-
Insights Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 11
- Quantum Physics
-
Insights What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 3
- General Math
-
Insights Relativator (Circular Slide-Rule): Simulated with Desmos - Insight
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 1
- Special and General Relativity
-
Insights Fixing Things Which Can Go Wrong With Complex Numbers
- Started by PAllen
- Replies: 7
- General Math