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 / E14

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.