# (New 2017) AQA A-level Physics 7408 [Exam Discussion] Watch

Announcements

**AQA A-LEVEL PHYSICS 7408 (NEW SPECIFICATION)**

**PAPER 1 - 7408/1**

Duration: 2h

Date: 15 June 2017

am/pm: am

**PAPER 2 - 7408/2**

Duration: 2h

Date: 21 June 2017

am/pm: am

**PAPER 3 - 7408/3**

Duration: 2h

Date: 29 June 2017

am/pm: am

________________________________

1

reply

Report

#2

In electromagnetic induction, the rate of change of flux is the change in field lines per second right? is this the idea of Faraday's law? also what factors affect the rate of change of flux and why?

0

reply

Report

#3

(Original post by

In electromagnetic induction, the rate of change of flux is the change in field lines per second right? is this the idea of Faraday's law? also what factors affect the rate of change of flux and why?

**Nai18**)In electromagnetic induction, the rate of change of flux is the change in field lines per second right? is this the idea of Faraday's law? also what factors affect the rate of change of flux and why?

*A*multiplied by the magnetic field

*B*, provided that the direction of the magnetic field is perpendicular to the area.

The rate of change of flux is affected by the magnetic field strength and the area 'swept' per unit time.

*Φ*=

*BA*

*d*

*Φ/dt = d(BA)/dt*

since for a uniform magnetic field,

*B =*const, the rate of change of magnetic flux is only really affected by the rate of change of perpendicular area:

*d*

*Φ/dt = B dA/dt*

just remember that

*dA/dt*could be represented as a length traversed by a speed per unit time.

1

reply

Report

#4

(Original post by

Field lines aren't really a 'thing', they just represent the direction of a magnetic field. The rate of change of flux is the area

The rate of change of flux is affected by the magnetic field strength and the area 'swept' per unit time.

since for a uniform magnetic field,

just remember that

**testytesttest**)Field lines aren't really a 'thing', they just represent the direction of a magnetic field. The rate of change of flux is the area

*A*multiplied by the magnetic field*B*, provided that the direction of the magnetic field is perpendicular to the area.The rate of change of flux is affected by the magnetic field strength and the area 'swept' per unit time.

*Φ*=*BA**d**Φ/dt = d(BA)/dt*since for a uniform magnetic field,

*B =*const, the rate of change of magnetic flux is only really affected by the rate of change of perpendicular area:*d**Φ/dt = B dA/dt*just remember that

*dA/dt*could be represented as a length traversed by a speed per unit time.(sorry if this looks bad i dont know how to do the delta signs so assume the t is delta t)

0

reply

Report

#5

(Original post by

Oh so if area is L x L and the area swept is L x vt , would you sub that into A and you get induced EMF= B x lvt / t and the delta t's cancel out leaving Induced EMF = Blv

(sorry if this looks bad i dont know how to do the delta signs so assume the t is delta t)

**Nai18**)Oh so if area is L x L and the area swept is L x vt , would you sub that into A and you get induced EMF= B x lvt / t and the delta t's cancel out leaving Induced EMF = Blv

(sorry if this looks bad i dont know how to do the delta signs so assume the t is delta t)

*L.*

In a time interval

*dt*, it will cut

*Lvdt*, where

*v*is the speed, so yes, the area

*A*swept per unit time is

*A = Lvt*

*.*

You normally shouldn't be able to assume that you can directly substitute this into

*E = dΦ/dt*, but this is A-level, so as long as you're confident that the rate doesn't change for some reason, then it should be fine. So in the case of a wire crossing perpendicular to a uniform magnetic field,

*E = BLv*

0

reply

Report

#6

(Original post by

Imagine that you have your conductor cutting flux is a wire of length

In a time interval

You normally shouldn't be able to assume that you can directly substitute this into

**testytesttest**)Imagine that you have your conductor cutting flux is a wire of length

*L.*In a time interval

*dt*, it will cut*Lvdt*, where*v*is the speed, so yes, the area*A*swept per unit time is*A = Lvt**.*You normally shouldn't be able to assume that you can directly substitute this into

*E = dΦ/dt*, but this is A-level, so as long as you're confident that the rate doesn't change for some reason, then it should be fine. So in the case of a wire crossing perpendicular to a uniform magnetic field,*E = BLv*
0

reply

Report

#7

(Original post by

Ah i see that makes a lot of sense. In lenz law, is it the current induced due to the induced EMF opposes the change in flux?

**Nai18**)Ah i see that makes a lot of sense. In lenz law, is it the current induced due to the induced EMF opposes the change in flux?

*E = -dΦ/dt*

0

reply

Report

#8

(Original post by

....The rate of change of flux is the area

**testytesttest**)....The rate of change of flux is the area

*A*multiplied by the magnetic field*B*, provided that the direction of the magnetic field is perpendicular to the area. ....**NOT**rate of change of

*magnetic*flux in saying that the area

*A*multiplied by the magnetic field

*strength*

*B*, provided that the direction of the magnetic field is perpendicular to the area.

(Original post by

….just remember that dA/dt could be represented as a length traversed by a speed per unit time.

**testytesttest**)….just remember that dA/dt could be represented as a length traversed by a speed per unit time.

*A*/d

*t*has unit of [m

^{2}/s] but the term “a length traversed by a speed per unit time” has a unit of [m

^{2}/s

^{2}].

0

reply

Report

#9

(Original post by

I think you meant magnetic flux

d

**Eimmanuel**)I think you meant magnetic flux

**NOT**rate of change of*magnetic*flux in saying that the area*A*multiplied by the magnetic field*strength**B*, provided that the direction of the magnetic field is perpendicular to the area.d

*A*/d*t*has unit of [m^{2}/s] but the term “a length traversed by a speed per unit time” has a unit of [m^{2}/s^{2}].First part was my mistake but looking at the mathematical expressions should rectify this.

0

reply

Report

#12

(Original post by

Clearly the second part refers to something which already has one length dimension. It's not a dimensionless 'nothing' that is crossing the magnetic field. That should be implicit. A crossbar of length L is essentially passing across a magnetic field. The area per unit time cut by this gives the dimensions L^2 T^2. ...

**testytesttest**)Clearly the second part refers to something which already has one length dimension. It's not a dimensionless 'nothing' that is crossing the magnetic field. That should be implicit. A crossbar of length L is essentially passing across a magnetic field. The area per unit time cut by this gives the dimensions L^2 T^2. ...

The term d

*A*/d

*t*has unit of [m

^{2}/s] but the term “a length traversed by a speed per unit time” has a unit of [m

^{2}/s

^{2}] which seems to agree by you (you say dimensions L

^{2}T

^{-}

^{2}– typo in your power for the time).

If this is the case, then your following “representation” is not equivalent:

….just remember that dA/dt could be represented as a length traversed by a speed per unit time.

The term d

*A*/d

*t*is just a metal rod of length

*L*moving perpendicular to the magnetic field at a speed of

*v*or a metal rod of length

*L*cutting the magnetic field at a rate of

*v*.

1

reply

Report

#13

(Original post by

I am not sure if you really understand what I am trying to imply.

The term d

If this is the case, then your following “representation” is not equivalent:

because the two terms have different dimensions or units.

The term d

**Eimmanuel**)I am not sure if you really understand what I am trying to imply.

The term d

*A*/d*t*has unit of [m^{2}/s] but the term “a length traversed by a speed per unit time” has a unit of [m^{2}/s^{2}] which seems to agree by you (you say dimensions L^{2}T^{-}^{2}– typo in your power for the time).If this is the case, then your following “representation” is not equivalent:

because the two terms have different dimensions or units.

The term d

*A*/d*t*is just a metal rod of length*L*moving perpendicular to the magnetic field at a speed of*v*or a metal rod of length*L*cutting the magnetic field at a rate of*v*.I suggest you read my lecture notes to further understand this concept:

0

reply

Report

#14

(Original post by

I think you're confused by the idea that the thing traversing the magnetic field itself has a dimension. So an object with dimensions [L] traversing at a speed, i.e dimensions [LT^-1] per unit time gives the correct dimensions for this. My OP was unclear but I explained it in my first response.

I suggest you read my lecture notes to further understand this concept:

**testytesttest**)I think you're confused by the idea that the thing traversing the magnetic field itself has a dimension. So an object with dimensions [L] traversing at a speed, i.e dimensions [LT^-1] per unit time gives the correct dimensions for this. My OP was unclear but I explained it in my first response.

I suggest you read my lecture notes to further understand this concept:

I think we are disagreeing on the dimensions for “something per unit time”. As I can see your lecture note said

area ‘sweeped’ per unit time has a dimension of [

*L*^{2}]I disagreed. It should have the dimensions of [

*L*

^{2}/

*T*].

Look at Q22 in the following link

http://theory.caltech.edu/~politzer/QP-Problems.html

Look at the way others use it:

https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...a-wire.898856/

http://slideplayer.com/slide/4514158/

If you google the term area swept out per unit time, it is not hard to find that the dimensions are

*L*

^{2}/

*T*instead of

*L*

^{2}.

I believe in physics where we say something per unit time, it should have an additional dimension like [something]/[

*T*].

…an object with dimensions [L] traversing at a speed, i.e dimensions [LT^-1] …

But if you add per unit time to the sentence, then the dimension should be

*L*

^{2}/

*T*

^{2}.

If you want to insist that I am confused. I am ok. (You can PM me to argue about it.)

PS : In Newtonian gravity, if you have studied Kepler’s law, the quantity “area swept out per unit time” is pretty common and it has the dimension of [

*L*

^{2}/

*T*]. I am just surprised that when this quantity is used in electromagnetism, the dimensions change!

0

reply

0

reply

Report

#16

(Original post by

Someone help me out here. Why exactly is the resultant force equal to ? Isn't also downwards?

**markschemes**)Someone help me out here. Why exactly is the resultant force equal to ? Isn't also downwards?

So the should be upward while weight is the only downward force.

0

reply

(Original post by

Think the "extendable" bungee rope as a spring, when you stretch the outward, the spring is "stretching" inward.

So the should be upward while weight is the only downward force.

**Eimmanuel**)Think the "extendable" bungee rope as a spring, when you stretch the outward, the spring is "stretching" inward.

So the should be upward while weight is the only downward force.

0

reply

Report

#18

(Original post by

Is this always the case? Should I always consider F going upwards?

**markschemes**)Is this always the case? Should I always consider F going upwards?

What is the F that I should always consider going upward?

I am sorry that I don't really know what you are asking.

0

reply

(Original post by

What do you mean is this always the case?

What is the F that I should always consider going upward?

I am sorry that I don't really know what you are asking.

**Eimmanuel**)What do you mean is this always the case?

What is the F that I should always consider going upward?

I am sorry that I don't really know what you are asking.

0

reply

X

### Quick Reply

Back

to top

to top