|
Tube DIY Asylum Do It Yourself (DIY) paradise for tube and SET project builders. |
|
|
|
Tube DIY Asylum Do It Yourself (DIY) paradise for tube and SET project builders. |
|
In Reply to: RE: You poor man~nT posted by Tre' on August 13, 2014 at 17:18:03:
Hi Tre,
The induced magnetisation M is proportional to the applied field times the susceptibility. For a given applied field, the *strength* of the magnetisation is proportional to the absolute value of the susceptibility. M will be parallel to the applied field if the susceptibility is positive, and anti-parallel if it is negative. But the strength of the magnetic polarisation induced by the external field will be proportional to the absolute value of the susceptibility.
Thus silver will have a larger magnitude of induced magnetisation than copper.
If you used your definition, then you would also say that a pure vacuum (susceptibility =0) had a larger induced magnetisation than silver, and by your arithmetic the magnetisation of the vacuum would be -2.6/0 = infinity times bigger than the magnetisation for silver. Even though the vacuum cannot magnetise at all!
You need to take the absolute values here, in order to discuss which material magnetises more than another. And you shouldn't turn the fraction upside down just because the quantities are negative.
This is all really pretty academic, since the susceptibilities in both cases are tiny! I don't for one moment imagine that there will be any observable audible effects in the OP's set-up due to this!
Chris
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 18:02:29 08/13/14 (4)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Tre' 20:24:14 08/13/14 (0)
- RE: You poor man~nT - dave slagle 18:29:54 08/13/14 (2)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 18:45:03 08/13/14 (1)
- In a word... - op48no1 18:47:21 08/13/14 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
