ON THE PARADOXES OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION

K.B. Kann
kkann@yandex.ru

"The miracle - not something that

contradicts the laws of nature, but what
contradicts our knowledge of these laws."
St. Augustine
Abstract
It is shown that some paradoxes, connected with the fundamental law of
electromagnetic induction, are explained by incorrect ideas about the nature of this
phenomenon. Electromagnetic induction is one of the methods of the electrical
energy generation, in which the participation of electric charges is compulsory.
Taking into account this circumstance the application of the Faradays induction
law doesnt lead to any paradoxes.
Keywords: paradoxes of electromagnetic induction, Faradays and Maxwells
induction laws, electric charges, the induction generation of electricity, the
permission of paradoxes.
1. Introduction
The discovery of electromagnetic induction was one of the greatest scientific achievements of
the 19th century. This phenomenon is the basis for the contemporary electrical engineering and
electrodynamics. For almost two centuries it has been serving successfully to the civilization
and technical progress. Therefore specialists were astonished, when it was revealed that in some
electric circuits electromagnetic induction behaves "incorrectly".
Quantitatively the electromagnetic induction is described by the fundamental law:

d
dt

(1)

, which appears in the closed circuit, is determined by the

time derivative of the magnetic flux penetrating this circuit.
The induction emf

In some cases this law for some reason fails. One of the experimental facts was even called
Hering's paradox. In the middle of the past century the consideration of the Hering's
paradox among the specialists leaded to the great discussion in the scientific press [1-4].
Let us consider some "paradoxes" of electromagnetic induction, for which still have no
satisfactory explanations.
2. Herings paradox and other
Figure 1 shows a Hering's device (see [3]). Magnetized iron toroid 1 is enveloped by the
closed circuit, which consists of two spring clips 2 and a galvanometer 3. During the stripping
off of a spring loop from the toroid (without the disturbance of the metallic contact) the magnetic
flux, which penetrates a circuit, varies from the original value to zero. The Herings paradox
1

consists in the fact that in this case in the circuit induction emf which follows from the
dependence (1) does not appear. This "paradox" has not yet received a satisfactory explanation.
In the debate were offered other schemes, in which the law of electromagnetic induction (1)
fails. On Fig. 2 shows the simplest scheme, proposed in 1968 by Tilley [5]. The chain consists of
two loops with the jumper ab. In the right loop included a
galvanometer G, and constant magnetic flux (e.g.,
permanent magnet) penetrates through the left loop. If to
break the jumper ab, a pointer galvanometer - according to
the law (1) - must to show a brief pulse of induction current
in the circuit. But any emf in this experiment was absent.
Analyzing this paradox, the participants of debate came
to the conclusion that the expression (1) of electromagnetic
induction violates the law of conservation of energy. In
fact: to create of induction emf requires another
("extraneous") energy. But the opening of requires almost no
expenditure of energy! Where to get emf?
Discussion come a dead end.
Recently in Eur. J. Phys. the work [6] was published, the
authors of which examined in detail several electric circuits,
where the violation of electromagnetic induction law appeared.
By means of the simple device they conducted their own
experiment, which confirmed the violation of the law (1).
Let us explain the essence of these "paradoxes" by the
example of this experiment.
Figure 3 schematically presents the experimental device
of the authors [6]. It represents two coaxial solenoids. The
primary circuit included the internal solenoid (I), the direct
current source U and the rheostat R. The second circuit
consisted of the external potentiometer (II), to the cursor of
which the ballistic galvanometer G was connected.
In the most complete form the law of electromagnetic
induction is written as follows:

d
d
= ( N ) ,
dt
dt

where = N - flux linkage - complete magnetic flux, which penetrates the turns
solenoid.
Differentiating (2), we obtain:
2

(2)

of the

d

N
( N ) =
+N
.
dt

(3)

It is evident that the induction emf in the solenoid II must appear in all cases, when flux
linkage changes. In particular, if the magnetic flux through the solenoid does not change

( (t ) = const ) , the induction emf equals to

=

N
.
t

(4)

In the experiment [6] in the internal solenoid supported constant current, and total magnetic
flux (flux linkage) in the solenoid II was regulated by changing the number of turns N in the
secondary circuit by switching on/off switch K2 or by moving the cursor of the potentiometer.
However, with any changes in the number N of the turns the galvanometer didnt reveal any
inductive current in the circuit.
By analyzing of the system of Maxwell's equations, the authors [6] obtained the induction
law (1) and showed that this dependence can to be fulfilled only when the magnetic field and the
shape of the electrical circuit are changing in time continuously. The authors named these
mathematical requirements the conditions for the validity of Faradays induction law.
The authors failed to find a technical solution which would allow changing the shape of the
contour (the number N of turns) smoothly and continuously. Thus, the absence of emf in an
induction coil II they assume as a proof of the correctness of their investigations.

3. Faradays and Maxwells induction laws

First of all it should be noted that there are two forms of the electromagnetic induction law.
Faraday, who discovered this phenomenon in 1831, described it by the dependence:

q =

(5)

The charge q , passing through the closed circuit, is proportional to the change of

the magnetic flux , penetrating the circuit, and it is inversely proportional to the
resistance r of the circuit.
Currently, the "Basic Law of electromagnetic induction" is called another relation:

d
:
dt

(6)

Variable (in time) magnetic field creates in the space a vortex electric field.
This expression would be rather called Maxwells induction law, because in this very form
it was included in the famous system of J. Maxwells equations of electrodynamics.
Although the expression (6) is easily obtained from (5) with the help of simple mathematical
transformations (see [7]), the physical meaning of these dependences fundamentally different.
Actually they describe two different physical processes: if by the Faraday law in the process of
3

electromagnetic induction in a closed conductor arise an electric current, according to (6)

alternating magnetic flux creates an electric field of induction emf. On the website
electrodynamics.narod.ru [8] we have shown that the idea of fields interaction distorts the
nature of electromagnetic induction. This idea has sent the development of classical
electrodynamics in the wrong direction, which leads today to numerous paradoxes.
4. The electromagnetic induction
To explain the "paradoxes" arising from the use of the dependence (1), it is necessary to
understand the nature of electromagnetic induction, what this dependence, unfortunately, reflects
wrongly.
Figure 4 shows the conducting section, moving in the magnetic field B with the speed v .
Free electric charges in the conductor (let us consider them to be positive) are exposed to the
influence of the magnetic force of Lorenz, when the conductor crosses the lines of the magnetic
field:

FL = q [ v, B ] ,
where q a particle charge. According to this dependence the
magnetic force moves free positive charges towards the upper edge
of the section. Between the ends of the section the potential
difference is created which is numerically equal to the emf of this
micro-generator: = 1 2 . The forces, which move charges
in the process of the electric generation (in this case magnetic
forces), do not have the electrostatic nature. They move electric
charges against the electric field forces. Academician I. Tamm
called them extraneous forces [9]. The extraneous forces work in
the electric generators is converted into electrical energy (generator
emf).
The directed motion of charges in the moving conductor (let us
name it extraneous current) continues till the increasing electric
(potential, electrostatic) force Fc (Coulomb force) balances the magnetic force

(7)

FL .

The

phenomenon of electromagnetic induction is expressed in the fact that the excess charge

dq ,

which is accumulated at the end of micro-generator in the time dt , is proportional to the

magnetic flux d , which is crossed by the conductor in this time (in Fig. 4, shaded). This
experimental fact shows the dependence (5).
The potential drop at the ends of micro-generator will retain while the speed of the
conducting section remains constant. When it stops the micro-generator discharges rapidly:
under the influence of the potential difference (induction emf) the short-term reverse (potential)
current runs. At that the electrical energy converts to the heat. But this is already another process,
which does not refer straightly to the phenomenon of electromagnetic induction.
If, without ceasing the motion of the conducting section, we lock its ends on the resistance
R (dotted line in the figure 4), the direct current the value of which is determined by Ohms law
for the closed circuit will flow through the circuit:

I=

.
R+r

(8)

In this case the resistance of the conducting section r serves as the internal resistance of
micro-generator. The work of this generator differs in no way from the work of any other
source of current (mechanical, chemical and others). Therefore to call the current (8) the
inductive current is possible only genetically.
This description is fully consistent with the experimental results of Faraday. The
electromagnetic induction law in the Maxwells form (1) shows correctly (quantitatively) the
connection of the induction emf with the magnetic flux change. However, it assumes that the
induction current is the direct (potential) current (8). From the description of the induction
process given above it is evident that the inductive current precedes the induction emf formation
and causes the appearance of this emf. In the idea, describing the dependence (1), the cause and
the effect change places: it is assumed that the alternating magnetic field first induces emf, which
then creates inductive current.
5. Solution of paradoxes
Summing up the previous paragraph:
The phenomenon of electromagnetic induction is one of many methods to obtain electrical
energy (in the form of emf). In order to obtain induction emf, it is necessary to spend an
equivalent quantity of another (not electrical) energy. Extraneous forces serve as the mediator
between the source of energy and the induction emf in this process. In the phenomena of
electromagnetic induction such force is the magnetic force. It creates the inductive
(extraneous, not potential!) current, directed against emf and separating the charges of
opposite signs towards the output terminals of the inductive generator.
The interpretation of the induction process by the dependence (1) distorts the nature of
electromagnetic induction. It creates the illusion, that it is possible to obtain emf directly from
the alternating magnetic field - without the participation of electric charges. The given
examination shows that the induction emf appears as the result of the extraneous forces influence
on electric charges.
In the experiments with incorrect electric circuits the induction law is broken in the
understanding, which is assigned to it by the formulation (1). If the alternating magnetic field can
directly generate induction emf, then the relation (2) and the subsequent dependence (4) must be
fulfilled. Therefore the absence of induction emf during the connection (or exception) of some
turns in the second circuit seems surprising and inexplicable.
The situation substantially changes, if the mediators between the alternating magnetic field
and induction emf are electric charges. From (7) it is evident that the magnetic force appears
during the motion of electric charges in the magnetic field ( v 0 ). In order to obtain inductive
current in the conductor, it is necessary that the extraneous force would have a component along
wire. In other words: for the appearance of inductive current the conductor (or at least its part) in
its motion must intersect field lines.1
In all experiments, examined by the authors [6] (including their own), this intersection is
absent. Respectively the magnetic force, which creates inductive current, is absent too and
therefore there is no induction emf. A galvanometer fixes this result.
It is difficult to explain the Hering's paradox: the magnetic flux actually leaves a closed
circuit, and the galvanometer does not feel this! From the point of view of the mechanism of
electromagnetic induction described above there is nothing paradoxical: a magnetic flux slips
from the circuit together with the section of the circuit - iron bridge through the conducting
toroid. The magnetic flux abandons the closed circuit together with electrons, which are
contained in the iron "bridge" - part of the magnetic toroid between the elastic clamps. The

There is a widely extended opinion that the induction process in the closed circuit principally differs from the
electromagnetic induction in the moving conducting section. We showed [8] that the nature of induction process is
the same in all its manifestations.

electrons of circuit do not cross the lines of magnetic flux, the inductive current is absent, and the
induction emf does not appear in the circuit.
6. Conclusion
Paradoxes appear when our ideas about the natural processes do not correspond to their
physical nature. The given examination confirms this evident truth again.

References
[1] Bewley L.V. Flux Linkages and Electromagnetic Induction (1952, New York: Macmillan).
[2] Nussbaum A. Electromagnetic Theory for Engineers and Scientists Engineers (1965, New
York: Prentice-Hall).
[3] Nussbaum A. Faradays law paradoxes - Phys. Educ. 7, 1972. 231 2.
[4] Pugh E. M. - Am. J. Phys. 32, 1968. 879.
[5] Tilley D. E. - Am. J. Phys. 36, 1968. 458.
[6] Lopez-Ramos A, Menendez J R and Pique C. Conditions for the validity of Faradays law of
induction and their experimental confirmation - Eur. J. Phys. 29, 2008. 1069 -1076.
[7] http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/rus/catalog/pages/10798.html
[8] http://www.electrodynamics.narod.ru
[9] .. : . .
11- . .: , 2003. . 181. (I.E. Tamm. Bases of the
electricity theory. - Moscow: Fizmatlit, 2003. P. 181).