Quantcast

A community for students. Sign up today!

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

shivam_bhalla

  • 2 years ago

A magnet of pole strength m and length l is broken into two pieces. The pole strength of each piece is _________

  • This Question is Closed
  1. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @experimentX

  2. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Options a) m b)m/2 c) 2m d)m/4

  3. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I don't know the answer to be exact. let's try to think it in terms of current.|dw:1336268902939:dw|

  4. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    LOL. I have the answer with me. It is m/2 . But I don't know why. Is there any formula for magnetic pole strength. Because I don't seem to find one. Moreover I have only 20 minutes to leave for my exam centre and this is one of the sample questions

  5. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Any logic you would apply. I found only One formula which is m = pl m-->magnetic moment p-->pole strength l--->separation of charges. According to this I should get 2m but don't know why answer is given as m/2

  6. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I was guessing the same. If we remove the two loops above ... the field would reduce by 2

  7. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    How about the above formula Because m = NIA A--->area of cross-section I--->current Can you clarify how N would be affected on cutting the loop into 2

  8. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    seriously i dont know the formula ... to be honest i don't know anything about magnetism. My prediction is solely on addition of vector fields. Perhaps N = N/2 .... since current in the loop will not change and A is also same.

  9. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Ok. I found it. http://www.whatitequals.com/content/magnetic-moment-solenoid-magnetic-moment-loop N = Number of turns It would become N/2. Now applying this in the first formula I would get m/2 = p (l/2) So p_1 = p_2 ?? p-->pole strength Am I going wrong anywhere??

  10. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    new m = N/2 IA = old m/2

  11. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @experimentX , Can you make it little more clear what you are trying to convey ?

  12. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    since the no of turns are halved, the magnetic moment will also be halvened. and we have pl = m => which makes pole strength half it's original value.

  13. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @experimentX , I found this too http://www.pmtprep.com/posts/list/magnetism-a-magnet-of-pole-strength-m-and-magnetic-moment-m-1007572.htm;jsessionid=8B8406110F8322A5B9694123C241B5AE.node1#1234418 which says magnetic pole strength remains constant irrespective of separation between the poles

  14. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @experimentX L also becomes l/2

  15. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    then the strength is half.

  16. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment#Magnetic_moment_of_a_solenoid consider solenoid instead of magnet.

  17. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @experimentX , I considered the same bro

  18. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    permanent magnet right?

  19. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yes

  20. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    maybe your formula is wrong. Check your book. But I remember that the strength was relative to the length.

  21. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    And you can physically show that. When you break a big magnet the total B has to add up the same for both magnets.

  22. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    So if it was cut in half then both have an equal B that add up to the B of the original magnet

  23. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Which one @Romero . my source for m =NIA p=mL is wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment#Magnetic_moment_of_a_solenoid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment#Magnetic_pole_definition Ok. Thanks @experimentX and @Romero . The answer is http://www.pmtprep.com/posts/list/magnetism-a-magnet-of-pole-strength-m-and-magnetic-moment-m-1007572.htm which says magnetic pole strength doesnot change with change in length. It is only dependent on the area of the crossection of magnet. :) Looks like the sample paper answer key is wrong. Thanks for taking your time

  24. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    But when you cut them in half you actually have more surface than before cutting it.

  25. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @Romero ,In the formula it is area of crossection. See the diagram |dw:1336270957783:dw|

  26. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yea ... it seems plausible. LOL, there was L (length) ... i was thinking it current. lol

  27. Romero
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    But the answer given in the website refers to just surface area in general. You're right just pointing out that you take note on how you write things and word it correctly.

  28. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @Romero , yes they mentioned "surface area of poles" which should imply the "crossectional area" and their answer seems to match with that implication. Anyways. Thanks for all your help @Romero . I got to leave for my exam now :D

  29. experimentX
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    best of luck!!!

  30. shivam_bhalla
    • 2 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Thanks @experimentX

  31. Not the answer you are looking for?
    Search for more explanations.

    • Attachments:

Ask your own question

Ask a Question
Find more explanations on OpenStudy

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.