Past exam of the physics course of the year 1 of the natural sciences course of the University of Cambridge / 2015 / Paper 1 / Section E

In the Lorentz law, $q$ is signed electric charge, $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are the electric and magnetic fields at the bead, and the velocity in $q\mathbf{V}\times \mathbf{B}$ is its full laboratory velocity. Here $\mathbf{V}=v\hat{\mathbf{r}}+w\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$. Since $\hat{r}\times \hat{z}=-\hat{\theta }$ and $\hat{\theta }\times \hat{z}=\hat{r}$,The tangential component integrated around an instantaneous circle of nearly fixed radius givesThis is the stated tangential circulation work expression in the $w\gg v$ limit. It is tangential circulation work. The tangential circulation work versus particle work distinction matters because the bead actually follows an expanding spiral. The radial displacement may be small, but its force is proportional to $w$, so its power is of the same order as the tangential power. In factThe cancellation expresses the fact that magnetic forces do no work. Ignoring radial work while retaining the first-order tangential effect would incorrectly conclude that a magnetic field supplies net particle energy.

The electric field giving the same tangential force would be $\boxed{{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathrm{eq}}=-vB\hat{\theta }}$. This is a force-equivalent field for the moving guide, not evidence that a real circulating electric field has appeared in the laboratory merely because the loop expands in a static magnetic field. An electromotive force is the tangential driving-force circulation per unit charge, with units of energy per charge. For a material circuit moving with local velocity ${\mathbf{v}}_{\mathrm{loop}}$,Orient the ring counterclockwise with positive normal $+\hat{z}$. Its flux is $\Phi =B\pi R^2$, so $\dot{\Phi }=2\pi BRv$. The tangential circulation therefore givesIt is the motional term that matters here. For a fixed loop, the circulation of the actual electric field instead follows the partial time derivative of the magnetic field. The distinction between moving-wire magnetic forces and induction in a stationary loop is essential to the flux rule.^[ref]

For the magnetic power balance on an expanding circular guide, the guide must supply an additional inward reaction $-qBw\hat{r}$ opposing the radial magnetic force. With radial guide speed $v$, this contribution to its power on the bead is $P_{\mathrm{guide}}^{(B)}=-qBvw$, equal to the tangential magnetic power. The radial magnetic power is positive by the same amount, so the total magnetic power still vanishes; the mechanical exchange is associated with the moving mechanical constraint.

If “the ring's work” is meant as its full work on a finite-mass bead, the source statement needs a further qualification. For a frictionless bead of mass $m_b$ with constant imposed radial speed, its radial acceleration is $-w^2/R$, so the complete radial guide reaction and power areThe first term is present even when $B=0$ and describes the familiar change of tangential kinetic energy on an expanding guide. The requested $-qBvw$ is exactly the additional magnetic-field-dependent term, not that full reaction power. No bead mass or extra agency fixing $w$ is supplied, so it would be unjustified to assign a numerical total mechanical power or silently discard its centripetal contribution.

An inverse-square point-source field has constant flux through enclosing spheres because their area grows as $r^2$. In electrostatics, Gauss's law is ${\oint }_S\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{S}=Q_{\mathrm{enc}}/{\epsilon }_0$, or $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{E}={\rho }_e/{\epsilon }_0$. For a spherical charge distribution, rotational symmetry makes the exterior field radial and constant in magnitude on a concentric sphere, giving $\mathbf{E}=Q\hat{r}/(4\pi {\epsilon }_0{r}^2)$. Symmetry is needed to take the field outside the surface integral; Gauss's law alone does not make an arbitrary charge distribution spherical.

For gravity the corresponding relations are ${\oint }_S\mathbf{g}\cdot d\mathbf{S}=-4\pi G{M}_{\mathrm{enc}}$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{g}=-4\pi G{\rho }_m$. A spherical mass has exterior field $\mathbf{g}=-GM\hat{r}/r^2$. Inside a uniform sphere, $M_{\mathrm{enc}}(r)=4\pi {\rho }_m{r}^3/3$, so $\boxed{\mathbf{g}=-(4\pi G{\rho }_m/3)r\hat{r}}$. Inside an empty spherical shell the enclosed mass is zero and symmetry gives zero field. These examples distinguish an inverse-square exterior field from a field inside distributed matter.

The law also treats other symmetries, but their field-distance dependence differs: an infinitely long line charge has cylindrical rather than spherical spreading and a $1/r$ field. Flux conservation and geometry must both be used, rather than assuming every Gaussian surface leads to an inverse-square answer.

A time-independent conservative force defines a conservative vector field on a domain when the work between two points is independent of path, equivalently when every closed-path work integral vanishes. Define a potential energy $U$ by $\boxed{\mathbf{F}=-\nabla U}$ and $U(B)-U(A)=-{\int }_A^B\mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}$. The additive constant is arbitrary; only differences affect work. A vanishing curl is necessary, and is sufficient on a simply connected domain under the usual smoothness assumptions. Local zero curl by itself need not guarantee a single-valued global potential on a domain with holes.

For a test mass outside a point or spherical mass, $U=-GMm/r$ with zero at infinity reproduces the inward gravitational force. Near a surface with approximately uniform downward gravity, $U=mgz$ when $z$ increases upward. A linear spring has $U=k{x}^2/2$. In electrostatics the electric potential is energy per unit charge, so $U=qV$ and $\mathbf{E}=-\nabla V$; potential and potential energy have different units and roles.

For motion under a time-independent conservative force, $d(K+U)/dt=0$. nonconservative forces change the mechanical energy by their work, and an explicitly time-dependent potential can exchange energy with the external agency changing it. A time-varying magnetic field can give a circulating electric field, so not every electric field is electrostatic or conservative. Conversely, zero magnetic work on a charge does not turn a velocity-dependent magnetic force into an ordinary position-potential force.

For a test particle outside a spherical central mass, the gravitational force is central, so angular momentum is conserved and the orbit is planar. With specific angular momentum $h=r^2\dot{\theta }$ and specific orbital energy $ϵ={\dot{r}}^2/2+h^2/(2r^2)-GM/r$, the radial effective potential combines attraction with the centrifugal barrier. Its nonradial solutions are conic sections:For nonzero $h$, negative energy gives an ellipse with $0\le e<1$, zero energy a parabolic Kepler orbit and positive energy a hyperbolic Kepler orbit. The circle is the special case $e=0$. Exactly radial motion is a separate zero-angular-momentum case and may hit the central body; a mathematical point-mass trajectory is not automatically a physically noncolliding orbit.

Conservation of $h$ gives constant areal velocity $h/2$, so equal areas are swept in equal times. For a bound ellipse of semimajor axis $a$, $ϵ=-GM/(2a)$ and $T^2=4{\pi }^2{a}^3/(GM)$. A circular orbit has speed $\sqrt{GM/r}$, while the minimum local escape speed is $\sqrt{2GM/r}$, obtained by setting the total energy to zero. These are the test-mass two-body results: a comparable second mass requires the relative-coordinate gravitational parameter $G(M+m)$, and nonspherical structure or drag can perturb the conic and its conserved quantities.

In SI units, with microscopic charge density ${\rho }_e$ and current density $\mathbf{J}$, Maxwell's equations can be writtenThe first relates electric flux to charge. The second states that the net magnetic flux through a closed surface is zero. Faraday's law relates electric circulation to changing magnetic flux. The Ampère-Maxwell equation includes both conduction current and displacement current; the latter is essential to time-dependent fields and local charge conservation.

For fixed contours and spanning surfaces, the integral curl equations are $\oint \mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{l}=-d{\Phi }_B/dt$ and $\oint \mathbf{B}\cdot d\mathbf{l}={\mu }_0{I}_{\mathrm{enc}}+{\mu }_0{\epsilon }_{0}d{\Phi }_E/dt$. For a moving material contour the first must include the motional force term; its total emf is $\oint (\mathbf{E}+{\mathbf{v}}_{\mathrm{loop}}\times \mathbf{B})\cdot d\mathbf{l}$. This prevents confusing a changing circuit area with a partial time derivative of a static magnetic field.

Taking the divergence of the Ampère-Maxwell equation and using electric Gauss's law gives ${\partial }_t{\rho }_e+\nabla \cdot \mathbf{J}=0$. In a source-free vacuum, combining the two curl equations gives ${\nabla }^2\mathbf{E}-{\mu }_0{\epsilon }_0{\partial }_t^2\mathbf{E}=0$, and similarly for $\mathbf{B}$, predicting electromagnetic waves of speed $c=1/\sqrt{{\mu }_0{\epsilon }_0}$. The Lorentz force law then specifies how these fields act on a charge. Macroscopic matter descriptions may instead use $\mathbf{D}$ and $\mathbf{H}$ with free sources and constitutive relations; those should not be silently mixed with the microscopic-source equations above.