Why do spinning objects exhibit right angles in their behavior?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GTrax
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angles
AI Thread Summary
Spinning objects exhibit right angles in their behavior due to the fundamental principles of electromagnetism and angular momentum. The left-hand and right-hand rules illustrate how forces, currents, and magnetic fields interact, with maximum force occurring when these elements are perpendicular. This perpendicularity is not just an observed property but is deeply rooted in the mathematical modeling of electromagnetic phenomena. The connection between spinning masses and currents suggests that both systems share a geometric relationship, where the plane of rotation and the normal line create right angles. Overall, the right-angled behavior in these contexts reflects a fundamental aspect of physics that links mechanics and electromagnetism.
GTrax
Messages
156
Reaction score
10
We have the left-hand (motor) rule. We know exactly what happens when we run a current in a magnetic field.

Its reversible! The right hand (generator) rule tells us what voltages and currents occur when we move the conductor in a magnetic field. Interesting we have to do work to get it done if we happen to be running a current. Interesting too that the current itself makes a field around the wire that locally modifies the original field.

Why the right-angledness? Is this addressed anywhere, or is it just an observed and accepted property?

The only other place I know where I have seen relentless "act perpendicular" behavior is with my (ancient) to gyroscope. Maybe the electric / magnetic properties are also somehow associated with something spinning.

G
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It need not always be a right angle, but the sin of the angle between the directions. For example, in the Fleming's left hand rule, the force is equal to the product of the current and the direction of the magnetic filed times the sine of the angle between the latter two. It is actually a cross product. The direction of the force is given by the left hand rule, that is in the direction of the thumb, even if the angle between the I and B is not a right angle.
 
Hi Shooting Star

I confess I was really asking after something more fundamental!

I had used the famous search engine, and read what I could find on this. Clearly force is maximum when the current is at at right angles to the field, and at any other angle, only the component remaining will count. An engineering model rule. This is why generator windings make sinusoidal outputs when rotated in a linear field.

The engineers have already gamed the phenomenon to the point they can provide fine design information that very accurately models the effect. The right-angledness is a assumed physical property of magnetics, and electrics, and the associated force effects. For me, the more important observation is that the motion force is exactly at right angles to the plane of the field and current components.

Very closely associated, I think, is light and other frequency radiation. Before anyone says "photon" and "quantum" and "Maxwell", I already think the fact that making a time-varying electric field will produce a time-varying magnetic field at right angles!,and vice versa, is also just so interesting. It is very likely part of the same game, despite that no mechanical force is involved!
Even though the resulting (wave?) then zooms away at a uniquely interesting speed that occupies much of this forum space, the key thing I point to is that the direction is mutually perpendicular.

Even when we miss out the motion (generator) component, and physically restrain the conductors, and make a structure that forcibly sets boundary conditions on the fields so we store the energy in magnetic materials (a transformer), we have invoke the flux linkage concepts that admirably respect these cross product quantities.

We have lots of excellent mathematical modelling that preserve the right-angled axioms, and I fully respect the work that sets it out. I was just asking ... "What is it about the nature of so much we try to describe that somehow automatically ends up with this right-angled behavior property"?

Quite naturally, we would wonder if they are somehow tied together. Could a thing like the Left-Hand Motor Rule, Maxwell's Equations relating to electromagnetic fields, and a mechanical gyroscope all be displaying these right-angled cross-product behaviours, because they ultimately all involve something spinning?
 
(Reposting – not much modification)

One of your questions is if these behaviours are all involved to something spinning. You yourself have perhaps put a finger on it in your last paragraph, by noticing the similarity of gyroscopes and motors.

Keeping things very simple and without invoking higher dimensions etc, when a mass loop spins, there is angular momentum, and when a current loop spins, there is a magnetic field. The common thing is that in both cases, there is a plane of rotation, and there is only one straight line which is normal to the plane. In these cases, you get your right angles because of spinning indeed.

This goes at least a wee bit toward answering your question why there are right angles and cross products in both the cases. Many phenomena with right angles can perhaps be linked ultimately to such geometrical pictures. Of course, this has nothing to do with the question why angular momentum should exist, apart from the way we already think about it. I have not touched on the EM wave.

(On a slightly related note, when it was first discovered that an electron had an intrinsic magnetic moment, this was ascribed to some sort of intrinsic “spin” of the electron.)

If you would elaborate on your question a bit more…
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top