3 deleted 3 characters in body
source | link

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.

Now, all of this seems to say there isn't any such thing as inductance. Sure there is! Only, it's rather more complicated: electrons at rest aren't affected by stationary magnetic fields, but in the same way that moving electrons are affected by such fields, moving magnetic fields (or, more generally, time-varying magnetic fields) also cause a Lorentz force upon resting electrons. So, effectively, what you're saying about electrons being moved around by moving magnetic fields isn't all that wrong again, it only works quite a bit differently. A moving magnetic field will in fact "push resting conductance electrons" through a wire a bit, i.e. induce a voltage. But that voltage really can't be read as anything displacement-like, it's a fundamental electrodynamic phenomenon. In fact, the voltage in it'sits pure, exact value can only be measured if you prevent the conductance electrons from moving, as otherwise they would themselves cause a magnetic field cancelling the inductance etc. pp..

As you see, the whole subject is quite a bit more complicated than you thought. I'm sure you are capable of understanding it, but probably not in a few minutes, which is why your lecturer can't really be blamed for not trying to explain it right away.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, theyit would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.

Now, all of this seems to say there isn't any such thing as inductance. Sure there is! Only, it's rather more complicated: electrons at rest aren't affected by stationary magnetic fields, but in the same way that moving electrons are affected by such fields, moving magnetic fields (or, more generally, time-varying magnetic fields) also cause a Lorentz force upon resting electrons. So, effectively, what you're saying about electrons being moved around by moving magnetic fields isn't all that wrong again, it only works quite a bit differently. A moving magnetic field will in fact "push resting conductance electrons" through a wire a bit, i.e. induce a voltage. But that voltage really can't be read as anything displacement-like, it's a fundamental electrodynamic phenomenon. In fact, the voltage in it's pure, exact value can only be measured if you prevent the conductance electrons from moving, as otherwise they would themselves cause a magnetic field cancelling the inductance etc. pp..

As you see, the whole subject is quite a bit more complicated than you thought. I'm sure you are capable of understanding it, but probably not in a few minutes, which is why your lecturer can't really be blamed for not trying to explain it right away.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, they would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.

Now, all of this seems to say there isn't any such thing as inductance. Sure there is! Only, it's rather more complicated: electrons at rest aren't affected by stationary magnetic fields, but in the same way that moving electrons are affected by such fields, moving magnetic fields (or, more generally, time-varying magnetic fields) also cause a Lorentz force upon resting electrons. So, effectively, what you're saying about electrons being moved around by moving magnetic fields isn't all that wrong again, it only works quite a bit differently. A moving magnetic field will in fact "push resting conductance electrons" through a wire a bit, i.e. induce a voltage. But that voltage really can't be read as anything displacement-like, it's a fundamental electrodynamic phenomenon. In fact, the voltage in its pure, exact value can only be measured if you prevent the conductance electrons from moving, as otherwise they would themselves cause a magnetic field cancelling the inductance etc. pp..

As you see, the whole subject is quite a bit more complicated than you thought. I'm sure you are capable of understanding it, but probably not in a few minutes, which is why your lecturer can't really be blamed for not trying to explain it right away.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, it would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

2 added 1264 characters in body
source | link

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.

Now, all of this seems to say there isn't any such thing as inductance. Sure there is! Only, it's rather more complicated: electrons at rest aren't affected by stationary magnetic fields, but in the same way that moving electrons are affected by such fields, moving magnetic fields (or, more generally, time-varying magnetic fields) also cause a Lorentz force upon resting electrons. So, effectively, what you're saying about electrons being moved around by moving magnetic fields isn't all that wrong again, it only works quite a bit differently. A moving magnetic field will in fact "push resting conductance electrons" through a wire a bit, i.e. induce a voltage. But that voltage really can't be read as anything displacement-like, it's a fundamental electrodynamic phenomenon. In fact, the voltage in it's pure, exact value can only be measured if you prevent the conductance electrons from moving, as otherwise they would themselves cause a magnetic field cancelling the inductance etc. pp..

As you see, the whole subject is quite a bit more complicated than you thought. I'm sure you are capable of understanding it, but probably not in a few minutes, which is why your lecturer can't really be blamed for not trying to explain it right away.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, they would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, they would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.

Now, all of this seems to say there isn't any such thing as inductance. Sure there is! Only, it's rather more complicated: electrons at rest aren't affected by stationary magnetic fields, but in the same way that moving electrons are affected by such fields, moving magnetic fields (or, more generally, time-varying magnetic fields) also cause a Lorentz force upon resting electrons. So, effectively, what you're saying about electrons being moved around by moving magnetic fields isn't all that wrong again, it only works quite a bit differently. A moving magnetic field will in fact "push resting conductance electrons" through a wire a bit, i.e. induce a voltage. But that voltage really can't be read as anything displacement-like, it's a fundamental electrodynamic phenomenon. In fact, the voltage in it's pure, exact value can only be measured if you prevent the conductance electrons from moving, as otherwise they would themselves cause a magnetic field cancelling the inductance etc. pp..

As you see, the whole subject is quite a bit more complicated than you thought. I'm sure you are capable of understanding it, but probably not in a few minutes, which is why your lecturer can't really be blamed for not trying to explain it right away.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, they would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.

1
source | link

Well, your lecturer certainly shouldn't have put it like this, however it's true that you have got a lot wrong here. It's stuff you definitely will need to understand better if you're studying power engineering.

First, you seem to think that electrons are attracted by magnetic north poles. They aren't; in fact stationary charges and magnetic fields aren't concerned with each other in any way at all1!

Next, you're talking about electrons in circular orbits about the nucleus. That's roughly the Bohr model, which kind-of-sort-of-works, but not really. You want to familiarise yourself to the orbital model, which describes very well how bound electrons actually behave.
Even in an orbital, you might be inclined to talk about "the nucleus is off the center by a distance proportional to the voltage". That's again kind-of-sort-of-right since the nucleus lies in a locally-harmonic potential which can be read as "pertubation by an electric field (which in a fixed capacitor is proportional to the voltage) will cause a proportional displacement of the nucleus", but the way you phrase it it's still nonsense. Voltage "is" not a distance, it's a potential (i.e. energy).

Anyway, this isn't actually relevant to understanding rotating-magnet phenomena, i.e. inductance in coils. These are concerned only with conduction electrons, which aren't bound to any particular atom at all but "move" through the entire conductor, which is why there can be currents. It is these moving electrons that experience a significant force in the presence of a magnetic field. What current actually is is the number and "speed" with which these electrons move through the conductor, while even a strong displacement of the bound (valence) electrons would not consolidate a current2.


1Actually, electrons are also small magnets themselves (they have an instrisic quantum-mechanical spin) and therefore are attracted to inhomogenic magnetic fields, but that's quite another issue.

2Actually, they would... but that's mostly relevant in the high-frequency-regime, i.e. bound electrons that jiggle back and forth very quickly.