Re: Magnetic field and relative motion
From: Pmb (someone_at_somewhere.com)
Date: 06/17/04
- Next message: Richard Herring: "Re: Replying to another post on Internal Force Engines"
- Previous message: V.K.Tamhane: "Re: Current without magnetic field"
- In reply to: V.K.Tamhane: "Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: Bilge: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: Pmb: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: V.K.Tamhane: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:58:11 -0400
"V.K.Tamhane" <vktamhane12@rediffmail.com> wrote
> 1. Observer on the disc will notice magnetic field rotating along with
> the circuit and so seen from this frame, there is no emf generated in
> the circuit of stationary frame.
It is incorrect to think of magnetic fields as rotating as you mentioned.
Doing so can lead to serious errors. You're also incorrectly assuning that
no E-field in one frame means no E-field in all other frames. That is also
incorrect.
> 1. When the magnet producing the field is rotated and if the field is
> fixed then there will not be an emf.
> 2. If the field is rotating along with the magnet then too, emf will
> be zero. Because equal and opposite emf will be produced in the
> lengths MB and CD.
If the magnetic is rotated there will be no EMF but there will be an
electric field
The diagrams you posted are too confusing to read.
Pmb
- Next message: Richard Herring: "Re: Replying to another post on Internal Force Engines"
- Previous message: V.K.Tamhane: "Re: Current without magnetic field"
- In reply to: V.K.Tamhane: "Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: Bilge: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: Pmb: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Reply: V.K.Tamhane: "Re: Magnetic field and relative motion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
