Work done in rotating a current carrying loop

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the work done in increasing the spacing between a current-carrying loop and a wire. The original poster attempts to determine this work using potential energy calculations, specifically referencing the relationship between initial and final potential energies.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definitions of work done in conservative versus non-conservative fields, questioning the original poster's application of these concepts. There is a discussion about the nature of magnetic fields and their classification as conservative or non-conservative.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide insights into the definitions and implications of work done in magnetic fields, while others express uncertainty about the conservative nature of magnetic fields in this context. The conversation reflects a mix of interpretations and clarifications without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing debate about the classification of magnetic fields and the implications for calculating work done, with references to gravitational analogies and the interaction of magnetic dipoles with external fields. The original poster acknowledges a misunderstanding related to the work done calculation.

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: 530
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: [tex]\vec{F}_B=grad(\vec{m}.\vec{B})[/tex]. 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 [tex]\vec{F}_E=grad(\vec{p}.\vec{E})[/tex], 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.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
707
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
966
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K