right hand rule

J

Jamie Morken

Guest
Hi,

I was just wondering why the direction of the magnetic field around a
current carrying wire follows the right hand rule, and not a left hand
rule? It seems a bit unsymmetrical for one direction to be favoured
over the other? Any explanation for this? I would have thought that
current in a straight wire would induce a symetrical magnetic field.

cheers,
Jamie
 
I read in sci.electronics.design that Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness>
wrote (in <xbFyd.837$8e5.172@fed1read07>) about 'right hand rule', on
Thu, 23 Dec 2004:

If Uncle Al's Eotvos experiment gives positive results,
Click to expand...
Please enlarge or give a specific URL to a page in Uncle Al's big web
site.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
 
Kevin Aylward wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:

The mystery is why there are no magnetic monopoles

I don't personally see this as a mystery. Why should there be two
methods associated with E&M? Magnetic fields are simply electric fields
viewed from another reference frame. Electric fields are just the
manifestation of photon momentum exchange between charges. So, why
should there be magnetic monopoles?
Click to expand...
Naa. While a dynamic H and E field can be changed into the
other by looking from another reference, this is not true
for static E or H fields. This means a static H field doesn't
become a pure E field at "whatever" speed. "Whatever" in this
context means anything between minus c and plus c.

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
 
Jamie Morken wrote:

I was just wondering why the direction of the magnetic field around a
current carrying wire follows the right hand rule, and not a left hand
rule? It seems a bit unsymmetrical for one direction to be favoured
over the other? Any explanation for this? I would have thought that
current in a straight wire would induce a symetrical magnetic field.
Click to expand...
Not really explaining much :
If your current happens to have the other charge
(positrons) or direction, the H field would go
the other way round.

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
 
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:33:58 +0000, Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

"Jamie Morken" <jmorken@shaw.ca> wrote

... the right hand rule, and not a left hand rule?

Here is design screw up number two in electronic conventions.

You sit there with your pencil in your right hand, look at
your left and right down the answer. The light comes on
and you scramble to correct the mistake as the TA says
"Pass your papers forward".

Design screw up #1 was making the electron negative - well,
they tried to have it be positive but effed up.
Click to expand...
It's too bad Mr. Franklin never met Mr. Crookes:
http://neon.chem.uidaho.edu/~honors/crookes.html

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 22:04:58 +0100, Joop wrote:

Rene Tschaggelar <none@none.net> wrote:

Jamie Morken wrote:

I was just wondering why the direction of the magnetic field around a
current carrying wire follows the right hand rule, and not a left hand
rule? It seems a bit unsymmetrical for one direction to be favoured
over the other? Any explanation for this? I would have thought that
current in a straight wire would induce a symetrical magnetic field.

Not really explaining much :
If your current happens to have the other charge
(positrons) or direction, the H field would go
the other way round.

Rene

Indeed. If the OP would not have mentioned that it was a wire, both
left and right hand rules may apply.

An interesting effect occurs in semiconductor material. Here the
current might be perceived as free electrons going one direction, or
'holes' moving the other direction.
This might at first seem exactly the same. However, when a magnetic
field is applied to this conducting material the voltage potential on
the 'sides' will be of different polarity, depending on electron or
hole carriers. This with current flowing in the same direction (as
defined in the flowing from external plus to minus sense)

I'm sorry, but in English, this isn't the case. When electrons
Click to expand...
are going from left to right is exactly the same as holes going from
right to left, which is when you change hand-rules.

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:51:53 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:
Kevin Aylward wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:

The mystery is why there are no magnetic monopoles

I don't personally see this as a mystery. Why should there be two
methods associated with E&M? Magnetic fields are simply electric
fields viewed from another reference frame. Electric fields are just
the manifestation of photon momentum exchange between charges. So,
why should there be magnetic monopoles?

Naa.

Oh dear. Of course what I say is correct here.
Click to expand...
Of Course. You're The Aylward, The One Who Knows Everything That Could
Ever Possibly Be Known.
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.
 
I read in sci.electronics.design that Boris Mohar <borism_-void-
_@sympatico.ca> wrote (in <6nnqs0tmndu3pc6enlduu5lt1lomebfc9k@4ax.com>)
about 'right hand rule', on Sat, 25 Dec 2004:

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Click to expand...
Thank you. It will take me a few minutes to study that. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
 
Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Kevin Aylward wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:


The mystery is why there are no magnetic monopoles

I don't personally see this as a mystery. Why should there be two
methods associated with E&M? Magnetic fields are simply electric
fields viewed from another reference frame. Electric fields are just
the manifestation of photon momentum exchange between charges. So,
why should there be magnetic monopoles?

Naa.

Oh dear. Of course what I say is correct here.

While a dynamic H and E field can be changed into the
other by looking from another reference, this is not true
for static E or H fields.

Of course it can. With all due respect, clearly you haven't studied
Relativistic E&M.
Click to expand...
It admittedly was quite a while ago. You make me pull up
the second edition of JD Jackson again. Give me some time
to read the several chapters again.

Rene
 
I read in sci.electronics.design that Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness>
wrote (in <%k_Ad.24893$Cl3.2284@fed1read03>) about 'right hand rule', on
Thu, 30 Dec 2004:

Why broken symmetries exist; specifically, why we needed to invent
"hand" rules.
Click to expand...
Because a Universe without vector fields would be a very strange place
indeed. Once you have vector fields, 'hand' rules are inevitable.

How would you cope with a car that went forwards and backwards
simultaneously?
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
 
I read in sci.electronics.design that Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness>
wrote (in <DqiBd.38486$Cl3.12561@fed1read03>) about 'right hand rule',
on Fri, 31 Dec 2004:

BTW I tried to post a link to Unc's pdf but was beaten to it. Made any
sense of it yet?
Click to expand...
The Oetvos thing? No. I need an ice-pack on my head and a gallon of
espresso to tackle that.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top