Talk:Tesla (unit)

Strongest magnetic field in a superconductor

Commercial superconducting NMR magnets reach 20T. Furthermore, the link in ref. [2] is broken. So this passage should be deleted or corrected. 132.230.182.55 (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Please re-Explain the Explanation to provide a deeper conceptual image of this pseudo-scientific and impractical sounding phenomenon, and cite some sources!

---

"in the magnetic field of a huge horseshoe magnet 0,001 T,"

Hello, is this a typo? Can someone more experienced than I answer?

Sincerely,

Chris

This value 0f 0.001T is pretty low for a "huge" horseshoe magnet. Old fashioned magnets could create field of > 100 gauss, or 0.01T. More modern permanent rare-earth magnets have fields more like 10,000 gauss or about 1 Tesla.

Neil Bergstrom

Definition

The definition should be kg/C•s rather than kg/A•s². Amps are a derivative measurement from Coulombs and seconds which are the fundamental measurements involved. Given that it is given in several different forms, leaving kg/A•s² makes sense, but the SI base units should be corrected to use Coulombs rather than Amperes.

"SI base units should be corrected to use Coulombs rather than Amperes" - OK, so talk to CGPM and try persuading them. Meantime, your edits are undone.Evgeny (talk) 08:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

The definition should say unit of magnitic flux density, not magnetic field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:8D00:1100:4CDD:756C:BF2D:2778 (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

The definition shouldn't use the shorthand symbols only; it should have the definition in terms of the names of the units as well, to avoid confusion. --Starwed 20:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

And shouldn't the dashes in the various units (like m^-2) be the same length? They vary... ~Gertlex 18:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

---

hey.. someone put this in terms someone not taking physics would understand. like.. the amount of 1gram paperclips a magnet could pick up at 1 tesla.

Your example would be measured in webers, not teslas. For tesla examples, see the list of examples in this article. --Heron 21:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Copyedited and removed the following cruft:

>== SI multiples == >

SI multiples of tesla (T)

Submultiples			Multiples
Value	SI symbol	Name	Value	SI symbol	Name
10−1 T	dT	decitesla	101 T	daT	decatesla
10−2 T	cT	centitesla	102 T	hT	hectotesla
10−3 T	mT	millitesla	103 T	kT	kilotesla
10−6 T	μT	microtesla	106 T	MT	megatesla
10−9 T	nT	nanotesla	109 T	GT	gigatesla
10−12 T	pT	picotesla	1012 T	TT	teratesla
10−15 T	fT	femtotesla	1015 T	PT	petatesla
10−18 T	aT	attotesla	1018 T	ET	exatesla
10−21 T	zT	zeptotesla	1021 T	ZT	zettatesla
10−24 T	yT	yoctotesla	1024 T	YT	yottatesla
10−27 T	rT	rontotesla	1027 T	RT	ronnatesla
10−30 T	qT	quectotesla	1030 T	QT	quettatesla

Defining all these combinations of the SI units adds nothing to article

>== Explanation ==

>The tesla is the value of the total magnetic flux (a magnet's "power") divided by area. Hence, reducing >the affected area will generally increase the magnetic flux density.

>This will continue to occur until the material becomes magnetically saturated and/or the magnetic field >"leakage" increases so fast that no additional tesla gains are possible.

Makes no sense - what is being "reduced"? How does this have any relation to the definition of a unit?

84.92.241.186 22:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't n, the number of turns, be included when V or A are involved in the definition? Voltage should be volts/turn and current should be Ampere-Turns —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.134.146.86 (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

a large 14 kg loudspeaker magnet will have a coil gap of 1 T

I find this hard to believe, as a tesla is quite a large flux density, so I have tagged it with {{Fact}}. S. Morrow 23:11, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

How many tesla is a maglev track? Or a magnetic induction rail for transportation?

I'm trying to find info on that detail. 68.83.179.156 (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Yugoslavian?

The page says he's "Yugoslavian-American", but Tesla's own Wiki article says he was born in Austria, which is definitely not Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia is a part of Europe, which is stated on the Yugoslavia article. And before anyone complains to me about it, no, I won't edit it myself, because every edit I make is always reverted on Wikipedia, whether I'm trolling or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.230.26 (talk) 14:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

care to do some more homework before typing in here? Yugoslavia- does not exist anymore. And yes parts of former Yugoslavia were also part of Austrian-Hungarian Empire. Care to learn more about history? So all statements are correct: he is Serbian first and foremost.That is his nationality.But he could be considered Austrian and Yugoslavian as well.. Glad to be of help.

71.99.86.158 (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

"Electric vs Magnetic Field" what is this?

"Electric vs Magnetic Field

It's sometimes confusing as to the difference between magnetic field (in tesla) vs electric field strength. The difference is that a magnetic field is moving while an electric field isn't, this can be seen by looking at the units for each. Electric field is N/C, while magnetic field (in tesla) can be written as N/(C*m/s). Showing the difference between the 2 clearly is m/s, or movement. In ferromagnets the movement creating the magnetic field is the electron spin (and to a lesser extent electron orbital angular momentum). In current carrying wire (electromagnets) the movement the electrons move through the wire (whether the wire's straight or circular)."

Please remove this. It's badly written and barely makes any sense. Does anybody agree? --79.55.31.10 (talk) 14:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Units are WRONG!

The SI base units for the tesla is wrong in the Wiki article. Consult WolframAlpha and other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.188.165 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Huh? We can ignore this one. —Quondum 06:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Conversions

The bulk of the Conversions section consists of unsourced claims about the unit's non-usage among engineers, (although several of the article's sources seem to indicate otherwise), and claims that publications that do use it (presumably including mainstream journals) 'often' capitalize the unit. The correction is then oddly worded:

"However, as with gauss and other units, even those derived from names (watt, joule) the unit is lower-case when written out..."

...seeing as the allegedly preferred gauss is also derived from a name. The paragraph should probably be removed per WP:NOR. AveVeritas (talk) 06:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Done. —Quondum 06:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tesla (unit). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ru.nl/publish/pages/561854/frog-ejp.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:50, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of unit (T) with prefix (T)

Shouldn't there be a section describing the problem with this SI derived unit? All other official SI units (to my knowledge) are carefully designed to avoid conflict and ambiguity. But the tesla (unit) is given the symbol T, which is in direct conflict with the Terra (prefix) also a capital letter T.

For example, if one were to read 2.5 Tm, should that be interpreted as 2.5e+12 meters (a distance), or as 2.5 tesla*meters (a magnetic potential).

I read on the page about torque (as I recall) that the SI recommends, for example, Nm (newton-meter) to be used for torque, instead of mN (which is ambiguous -- it could mean meter-newton or milli-newton). But there is no discussion about the ambiguity with the symbol for tesla units -- which is a more serious problem in my opinion. I've been looking around for more info, and if I find it, I will update the article. Until then, any comments? Hydradix (talk) 01:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tesla (unit). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070618123613/http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/table3.html to http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/table3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 22 May 2017 (UTC)