Timeline for Hall effect for a magnet falling through a copper pipe?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2022 at 16:25 | comment | added | rob♦ | Let me chew on it for a while and see whether I can concisely explain what I’m thinking. | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 16:14 | comment | added | jkien | I do not really understand your claim that sustaining a Hall voltage between both ends of the pipe would require an electric field in regions of the pipe where the eddy current and the corresponding Lorentz force are zero. I think, according to physics, those regions of the pipe require a constant potential and zero electric field. Could you explain your claim in more detail? | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 19:56 | comment | added | rob♦ | Just to be clear: I think your effect would definitely be observed for a long magnet in a short pipe, which is why I started with that one. I can think of arguments for and against your effect being observable for a short magnet moving through a long pipe. Problems involving magnetically-induced currents are emphatically not electrostatic problems, even if you can sometimes find a piece of the problem where your electrostatic problem-solving toolkit gives you the right answer. | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 18:01 | comment | added | jkien | I accept this as your answer, but apparently we disagree. I don't think the size of the magnet matters. From my point of view, if the switch is open, and the vertical current is zero, it is an electrostatics problem, similar to Pascal's law of hydrostatics, applied to the sea of electrons in the copper pipe. A pressure change at some level in the cilinder is transmitted down to the bottom of the pipe. In contrast, your answer seems to imply that the blue forces in the drawing are not transmitted down to the bottom of the pipe. I don't think your idea is compatible with Newtons's third law. | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 17:01 | history | answered | rob♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |