Timeline for Magnetic flux through a loop the same as flux through the plane outside the loop?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 22, 2023 at 7:07 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 15, 2023 at 21:07 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 15, 2023 at 1:22 | comment | added | FlatterMann | I think this is a bit of a magnetic equivalent of the self-energy of a point charge. Nature simply doesn't allow us to reduce the size of charge/current distributions to zero without including, at least, a logarithmic divergence. Maybe the problem is a little deeper, though, than the usual static analysis suggests. In a relativistic universe no such thing as a "static" field can exist. The formation transient always takes infinite time to spread to all of space. At the "small end", the formation of an infinitesimal charge/current density would cause an infinite spike of em radiation. | |
| Apr 15, 2023 at 1:09 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 16:06 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 11, 2022 at 13:00 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 2:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 3, 2021 at 14:03 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 15, 2021 at 17:27 | comment | added | Leviathan | @RelativisticDolphin Your last sentence. Do you mean thickness of the loop, or area within the loop? You should provide a formula. | |
| Jul 15, 2021 at 15:05 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 16, 2021 at 18:06 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 7, 2020 at 12:03 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 3, 2020 at 14:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 5, 2020 at 1:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 5, 2019 at 14:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 1, 2019 at 23:01 | comment | added | Philip Wood | An approximate formula for the flux linked with a circular current-carrying loop of radius $𝑟$ made from wire of radius 𝑎 is $$\Phi=\mu_0 I𝑟 \ln(1.39𝑟/𝑎).$$ Is this what you arrived at (maybe without the 1.39) by considering the 'returning' flux outside the loop? | |
| Jul 1, 2019 at 21:01 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Feb 27, 2019 at 8:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 15, 2017 at 12:52 | answer | added | hyportnex | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 14, 2017 at 8:11 | comment | added | RelativisticDolphin | @PhilipWood yes I did and I got an expression independent of the thickness. I used the scalar magnetic potential and the magnetic moment of the wire loop. | |
| Dec 13, 2017 at 22:48 | comment | added | Philip Wood | You are right up to your last paragraph. But regarding this last paragraph, have you actually tried to calculate the inductance of a loop by integrating up the 'external' flux, as you propose? I can't do so (which may not be saying very much). | |
| Dec 13, 2017 at 22:02 | history | edited | RelativisticDolphin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 143 characters in body
|
| Dec 13, 2017 at 21:51 | history | asked | RelativisticDolphin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |