Work done in rotating a current carrying loop

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the work done to increase the spacing between a current-carrying loop and a wire. The initial approach involved calculating potential energies for the configurations using the formula U = -M.B. A key point of confusion arose regarding the definition of work done by conservative fields, with one participant noting that their book states W.D. = Uf - Ui, while they believed it should be negative. The conversation highlights the distinction between the work done by the field and the work done on the field, emphasizing that the magnetic field is generally considered non-conservative despite certain interactions appearing conservative. The participants conclude that the correct expression for work done in this scenario is indeed Uf - Ui.
zorro
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The arrangement is as shown in the figure.
Find the work done to increase the spacing between the wire and the loop from a to 2a.


The Attempt at a Solution



I calculated the potential energies in initial and final configurations using U=-M.B (all vectors)

I got
ac{\mu}{4\Pi&space;}2i_{1}i_{2}L\ln\left&space;(&space;\frac{2a+b}{2a}&space;\right&space;).gif


I have a problem finding out the work done from this.
Work done by a conservative field is defined as the negative of Uf - Ui .
But my book just uses W.D. = Uf - Ui without any negation.
Where is my mistake?
 

Attachments

  • mf.jpg
    mf.jpg
    3.8 KB · Views: 513
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume that you calculated Ui and Uf correctly :wink:

First, I don't think magnetic field is conservative field. But for the interaction between an external B-field and a magnetic dipole in particular, it happens to be "conservative" in a way that the force on the dipole is: \vec{F}_B=grad(\vec{m}.\vec{B}). It's kind of contradictory, and I have no explanation. Perhaps it is consistent with its twin - electric dipole - whereas the force on electric dipole inside an E-field is \vec{F}_E=grad(\vec{p}.\vec{E}), which shows the unification and relativity of B-field and E-field. But I'm no expert.

Back to your main problem. Let's take an analogous example from gravitational field. When you lift a book from height h1 to height h2, the work done by gravity is mg(h1-h2) or Ui - Uf, and the work done by you to lift it is mg(h2-h1) or Uf-Ui. So you see the difference? The expense of the field itself is always Ui-Uf, while what you give to / take from the field in compensation is Uf - Ui. The sum of those two is zero, and the law of energy conservation is safe.
 
grrrrr...I solve big problems and forget small things :redface:. Yes you are right, since we are doing work to increase the spacing, it should be Uf - Ui.
Thanks :smile:
 
Regarding conservative nature of magnetic fields, here in this case the current forms a closed loop. Hence the field is conservative ( even if its non-uniform )
 
Not really. The magnetic field is always non-conservative. The potential energy U you calculate is, in fact, the energy of interaction between external B-field and the loop, while the total energy of B-field of the system = energy of the loop + energy of the external B-field + U. That a field is non-uniform has nothing to do with whether it is conservative or not.
Anyway, I'm no expert, so I don't have an explanation on this for you.
 
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