Why Does Swiping a Card in a Plastic Bag Help It Read at the Checkout?

AI Thread Summary
Swiping a card sometimes fails due to dirt accumulation on card readers, which interferes with the reading process. Placing the card in a plastic bag may act as a "head cleaner," removing debris before the magnetic stripe passes through the reader. This method has been reported by multiple users, suggesting it may not be an urban myth. The discussion also touches on the idea that the plastic bag could alter the interaction between the card and the reader, enhancing the reading capability. Overall, this technique appears to provide a practical solution for improving card readability at checkout.
cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3
Sometimes when i swipe my card at walmart it doesn't read it , And the guy was like let's put it a plastic bag and then try it, and it works and I've heard a couple of other people doing this.
So when i slide my card the magnetic strip induces a voltage and reads the card. So why does putting it in a plastic bag work. Does this change the relative permittivity of the material.
Does the bag just add more di-electric material so the magnetic field interacts with the detector in the card reader like it should and not too strongly.
Any input will be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is one of those things that I would have considered an "urban myth" if I had not experienced it myself. The cashier's explanation makes more sense than most that I've heard (and not just because she's a friend of mine). The readers collect crud from dirty cards when they're swiped. When enough has accumulated, it interferes with the reading process. The plastic (or cellophane tape, or whatever) added to the card acts as a "head cleaner" like you use in a VCR or DVD player. It scrapes the crap off of the heads prior to the mag stripe passing, and so allows reading. Further evidence of that is that once it has been done, subsequent purchasers don't have a problem.
As a side-note to that, my card would never work at the ATM terminal in one of my local gas stations. The cashier there said that it hardly ever worked, because it was constantly contaminated with petroleum fumes.
 
i see thanks for the response .
 
Different analogy:

At 5:00AM I did a dance to make the sun rise. It didn't work. I sat down, and scratched my head and then tried it again at 6:30AM while wearing a headband, and, lo and behold, the sun rose. I therefore conclude that I was right to don a headband, and headbands make the sun rise. The popular use of headbands throughout the world prove my thesis.

Stated differently: the change you deliberately made is not necessarily the complete sum of changes made, therefore you can't assume the bag worked. The fact you can't think of a means by which it could work is probably indicative.
 
MagnetDave said:
The fact you can't think of a means by which it could work is probably indicative.

Have you been paying attention? I just outlined a very plausible means by which it could work. I don't know for sure that it's the correct answer, but certainly consider it possible.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top