I think it's because the relationship isn't linear. Gravitational force is m1m2/r^2, electrostatic force is q1q2/r^2, electricity and magnetism have been unified. Is there a pattern here? Is magnetic force something/distance^2?

I have always thought of this in terms of the surface area of a sphere, which is expressed by Area= 4*pi*radius^2. As you can see, the variable which changes is the radius, which is squared. The same force is being spread out over a larger surface area as the distance increases, thus you are looking for a reciprocal quantity, hence 1/radius^2. Less photons, smaller wave height, lower probability density, whatever it is, it's always struck me as an elegant way to think about it as a spherical surface expanding out from a point source. A kind of cute isomorphism. I have no idea if this is a valid way of thinking about these things, however. Maybe someone can tell me why I'm an idiot for thinking this way.

The compass needle is not a fixed, dimensionless point; the needle has length. The three far locations seem to check out, but the final two don't fit that model. Perhaps the difficulty is that the needle is getting closer to the magnet? The magnet is not directed at the very center of the needle? The needle itself provides shielding? The needle is trying to align with the combined field of both the Earth and local magnet?

No, the problem with the experiment was that the ruler wasn't offset so the magnet could be at the 90 degree mark. Move the ruler over so the magnet could be directly center of that point and the numbers would work out.

I dont even get what this is doing.. I dont get what the inverse square law even is.. I have an exam in two days and i was told to know what this is and how to do problems with it, which i dont. So if anyone could explain the just of it, that would be VERRRYYYY helpful! I also am in 8th grade adv. physics, so dont get to confusing please. I read somethig in my txtbook about the closest is one square, then 1/4th, then 1/9th but i dont get how they got that. Is it like squaring the number? I.E. 3squared is 9 etc. Thanksssss!!

The numbers come from the fact that approximately, if you double the distance, you quarter the force. If you triple the distance, the force will be divided by 9. Generally, multiply the distance by n, the distance drops by a factor of n^2. In other words, you multiply the distance by 1/n^2. Now it should be clear why the law is called the inverse (reciprocal) square.

Main content

Physics library

Course: Physics library > Unit 18

Lesson 3: Measuring magnetic fields

Inverse cube law (deflection method)

Name: Inverse cube law (deflection method)
Uploaded: 2013-04-26T16:04:11Z
Description: Attempt to measure the change in force of a magnet over a distance using the deflection of a compass. What is wrong with this approach?

Google Classroom

Attempt to measure the change in force of a magnet over a distance using the deflection of a compass. What is wrong with this approach? Created by Brit Cruise.

Want to join the conversation?

Sort by:

eightsquare
Posted 11 years ago. Direct link to eightsquare's post “I think it's because the...”
I think it's because the relationship isn't linear. Gravitational force is m1m2/r^2, electrostatic force is q1q2/r^2, electricity and magnetism have been unified. Is there a pattern here? Is magnetic force something/distance^2?
Button navigates to signup pageComment on eightsquare's post “I think it's because the...”
(10 votes)
Answer
- Tonjevic
  Posted 11 years ago. Direct link to Tonjevic's post “I have always thought of ...”
  I have always thought of this in terms of the surface area of a sphere, which is expressed by Area= 4*pi*radius^2. As you can see, the variable which changes is the radius, which is squared. The same force is being spread out over a larger surface area as the distance increases, thus you are looking for a reciprocal quantity, hence 1/radius^2.
  
  Less photons, smaller wave height, lower probability density, whatever it is, it's always struck me as an elegant way to think about it as a spherical surface expanding out from a point source. A kind of cute isomorphism.
  
  I have no idea if this is a valid way of thinking about these things, however. Maybe someone can tell me why I'm an idiot for thinking this way.
  Comment on Tonjevic's post “I have always thought of ...”
  (17 votes)
Exponentially Radical
Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to Exponentially Radical's post “The compass needle is not...”
The compass needle is not a fixed, dimensionless point; the needle has length. The three far locations seem to check out, but the final two don't fit that model. Perhaps the difficulty is that the needle is getting closer to the magnet? The magnet is not directed at the very center of the needle? The needle itself provides shielding? The needle is trying to align with the combined field of both the Earth and local magnet?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(5 votes)
Answer
- Teresa Moody
  Posted 8 years ago. Direct link to Teresa Moody's post “No, the problem with the ...”
  No, the problem with the experiment was that the ruler wasn't offset so the magnet could be at the 90 degree mark. Move the ruler over so the magnet could be directly center of that point and the numbers would work out.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (3 votes)
Exponentially Radical
Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to Exponentially Radical's post “To account for the fact t...”
To account for the fact that the center of the compass seems 3 cm from the zero of the meter stick, we should add 3cm to all distances?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(5 votes)
Answer
Exponentially Radical
Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to Exponentially Radical's post “We use sine to describe t...”
We use sine to describe the angle relationship? Why?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(3 votes)
Answer
- Cina Pour
  Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to Cina Pour's post “Soh Cah Toa <-----Learn w...”
  Soh Cah Toa <-----Learn what this is
  (Sine, Cosine, Tangent), is an easy way to geometrically represent it. Much easier than going into trigonometry, and much better explained/represented than just stating the angle facts.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (1 vote)
daniel torossian
Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to daniel torossian's post “Is this question similar ...”
Is this question similar to that of inverse square law ( method of oscillation) ? Only different cause in this video & question the compass is deflecting the magnetic energy in the magnet no matter how close the magnet is getting ?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(3 votes)
Answer
BRITTANY:)
Posted 11 years ago. Direct link to BRITTANY:)'s post “I dont even get what this...”
I dont even get what this is doing.. I dont get what the inverse square law even is.. I have an exam in two days and i was told to know what this is and how to do problems with it, which i dont. So if anyone could explain the just of it, that would be VERRRYYYY helpful! I also am in 8th grade adv. physics, so dont get to confusing please. I read somethig in my txtbook about the closest is one square, then 1/4th, then 1/9th but i dont get how they got that. Is it like squaring the number? I.E. 3squared is 9 etc. Thanksssss!!
Button navigates to signup pageComment on BRITTANY:)'s post “I dont even get what this...”
(1 vote)
Answer
- Insert Name Here
  Posted 11 years ago. Direct link to Insert Name Here's post “The numbers come from the...”
  The numbers come from the fact that approximately, if you double the distance, you quarter the force. If you triple the distance, the force will be divided by 9. Generally, multiply the distance by n, the distance drops by a factor of n^2. In other words, you multiply the distance by 1/n^2. Now it should be clear why the law is called the inverse (reciprocal) square.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (4 votes)
Conor
Posted 9 years ago. Direct link to Conor's post “If the distance of the d...”
If the distance of the deflection angle went past the max, what would you think would happen, even if it was possible?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer
negrjp
Posted 8 years ago. Direct link to negrjp's post “Do the resulting curve (f...”
Do the resulting curve (function) is an constant radius arc ?!
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer
Josh
Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to Josh's post “would the answer differ i...”
would the answer differ if you had a stronger/weaker magnet?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer
- GeniusBrain1000
  Posted 10 years ago. Direct link to GeniusBrain1000's post “Yes because different mag...”
  Yes because different magnets have different magnetic pulls. Most likely, the denser ones will have more pull.
  Button navigates to signup page
  (1 vote)
Fernanda Palacios
Posted 8 years ago. Direct link to Fernanda Palacios's post “Shouldn't the max angle b...”
Shouldn't the max angle be reached when the magnets are in contact or reeeealllyyy close to each other?
Button navigates to signup pageButton navigates to signup page
(1 vote)
Answer

Video transcript

(Vertical axis) deflection angle. (Vertical axis) deflection angle, (Horizontal axis) distance. (Vertical axis) deflection angle,