Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Faraday paradox or Faraday's paradox is any experiment in which Michael Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction appears to predict an incorrect result. The paradoxes fall into two classes: Faraday's law appears to predict that there will be zero electromotive force (EMF) but there is a non-zero EMF.
The Faraday paradox was a once inexplicable aspect of the reaction between nitric acid and steel. Around 1830, the English scientist Michael Faraday found that diluted nitric acid would attack steel, but concentrated nitric acid would not. [1] The attempt to explain this discovery led to advances in electrochemistry.
Faraday's law was later generalized to become the Maxwell–Faraday equation, one of the four Maxwell equations in his theory of electromagnetism. Electromagnetic induction has found many applications, including electrical components such as inductors and transformers , and devices such as electric motors and generators .
An essential step of solving the paradox is the realization that the inside of the conductive moving magnet is not field-free, but that a non-zero electric field strength = prevails there. If this field strength is integrated along the line B C ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {\mathrm {BC} }}} , the result is the desired induced voltage .
Faraday paradox: An apparent violation of Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction. Two capacitor paradox : an apparent violation of energy of an electric circuit composed of two ideal capacitors Quantum mechanics
For Faraday's first law, M, F, v are constants; thus, the larger the value of Q, the larger m will be. For Faraday's second law, Q, F, v are constants; thus, the larger the value of (equivalent weight), the larger m will be. In the simple case of constant-current electrolysis, Q = It, leading to
The Paradox of Choice; Paradox of the pesticides; Paradox of the plankton; Paradox psychology; Paradoxes of material implication; The Paradoxes of Mr. Pond; Perceptual paradox; Performative contradiction; Problem of future contingents
That means the paradox of different descriptions may be only semantic. A description that uses scalar and vector potentials φ and A instead of B and E avoids the semantical trap. A Lorentz-invariant four vector A α = (φ / c, A) replaces E and B [5] and provides a frame-independent description (albeit less visceral than the E– B ...