Why isn't the magnetic flux of a loop infinite?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of why the magnetic flux through a loop is not infinite, particularly in the context of the behavior of magnetic fields near current-carrying wires and the implications of wire thickness on flux calculations. Participants explore theoretical aspects, mathematical integrations, and practical considerations related to magnetic fields and flux in loops and solenoids.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if the magnetic field B behaves as 1/r² near the inner edge of a loop, the flux should be infinite, but they express uncertainty about their reasoning.
  • Another participant counters that the assumption of a wire with no thickness leads to incorrect conclusions, proposing that considering the wire as nested cylindrical shells resolves the issue.
  • A different participant questions the dependence of flux on wire thickness, arguing that similar reasoning should apply to solenoids where wire size is less significant.
  • One participant notes that the paradox relates to integration, indicating that while field density is high near the wire, the product of this density with an infinitesimal surface area during integration does not yield an infinite result.
  • Another participant shares a calculation of the flux produced by a long straight wire, asserting that the flux is dependent on the wire's radius and providing a specific formula.
  • Concerns are raised about the divergence of integrals near zero, with participants discussing the implications of letting the wire radius approach zero on the calculations of inductance and flux.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the relationship between wire thickness and inductance, noting a belief that thicker wires should have higher inductance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of wire thickness and the behavior of magnetic fields near current-carrying wires. There is no consensus on the implications of these factors for magnetic flux calculations, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their assumptions about wire geometry and the mathematical treatment of integrals, particularly regarding the behavior of fields and flux as parameters approach zero.

Arijun
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
If B~1/r2, then if we have a simple loop, B near the inner edge of the loop will be infinite (or close to it). Why then, would our flux not be infinite?

I also get infinity if I take
∫ ∇ X A *da =∫B*da =∫(closed)A*dl
Since A ~1/r and r~0 at the limit of our surface integral.

I know I am missing something simple here, help! If possible, show where I'm wrong in both of my attempts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're taking the wire carrying the current as having no thickness. If you consider the wire as nested cylindrical shells, you'll find (e.g. using Ampère's law) that each of these contributes a B outside itself but not inside. Therefore as you approach the wire from outside it, and then enter the wire, the field does not go to infinity.
 
That would seem to indicate that flux through a wire loop is very dependent on the thickness of the wire. That doesn't seem right to me. Furthermore, I would be able to make a similar argument for a solenoid for which (to any reasonable approximation) wire size makes no difference. Are you sure that's the only factor I'm missing?
 
Your paradox is more general than just the flux case. It is about integration. As you put it, in distances very close to the wire, the field density is very height ( not really infinite), but when you integrate for the flux, you also multiply the high value by an infinitesimal surface. The integral is not necessarily large then.
 
Last edited:
The line integral for x-2 diverges near zero, was I wrong in assuming the surface integral (I guess for [r0 - r]-2) similarly diverged?
 
I haven't calculated the flux for the loop, but I have considered a simpler case; the flux produced by a long straight wire (length L) inside the wire itself (radius a) and in the vacuum between it and a cylindrical metal sheath (radius b) acting as return wire. I find, using elementary maths, that
\Phi = \frac{\mu_0 I L}{2\pi} ln\frac{b}{0.61a}

So, in this case, the flux is indeed crucially dependent on the radius of the wire. [The factor of 0.61 is due to the flux inside the wire, and assumes a uniform current density over the wire's cross-section, so no skin effect, for example.]

Some quick thoughts about the solenoid... The local B on the inside wall of the solenoid due just to the adjacent wire is of the order of B_{loc} =\frac{\mu_0 I}{2\pi r_{wire}}, whereas the general field in the solenoid is B_{gen} =\frac{\mu_0 N I}{L_{sol}}.

But for a single layer coil N2r_{wire}=L.

Thus \frac{B_{loc}}{B_{gen}}= \frac{1}{\pi}

suggesting that perturbations to B near the solenoid wall due to the discreteness of the turns
of wire won't be very significant.

[This just an order of magnitude estimate. I'd be the first to acknowledge the crudeness of this treatment.]
 
Last edited:
Arijun said:
The line integral for x-2 diverges near zero, was I wrong in assuming the surface integral (I guess for [r0 - r]-2) similarly diverged?

To my knowledge, close to a thin wire, B is proportional to 1/r and A to ln(r) ( because B=\nabla \times A =\frac{\partial A}{\partial r}) . As we move toward the center of the loop, the dependence become less . But now I think their integrals are till infinite as you said.

I found in Wikipedia that the inductance of a circular coil depends on ln(r/a) where r is the loop radius and " a" is wire radius. So as "a" goes to zero, the inductance becomes infinite which, for a finite current, makes the flux infinite too.
 
Yes, the integrals are infinite, but only because you're letting a go to zero (which I think is an odd thing to do)!
 
This is actually very interesting ( and odd!). I thought thicker power transmission lines have a higher inductance than thinner ones.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K