Check out Lenz's law. we know according to Lenz’s law a reverse current will be induced that will oppose the cause which has produced it.
Lenz's law is my favorite subject for conversation.
When you use the word "reverse" you are not specifying "reverse" with respect to what ! e.g to past current, to current in another coil, etc...
Also, when the word "reverse" is a sign comparison operator, and as such it can only compare quantities of the same type. e.g.: current to current ...or voltage to voltage.
Also, your definition of the Lenz law is ambiguous. It should be:
"...a reverse current will be induced in the direction that will generate an internal opposing magnetic flux to the external magnetic flux which would otherwise change the total magnetic flux spanned by the inductor".
In a nutshell, a charging magnetic field always produces current having a direction which opposes what induced it.
Not quite. It should be rephrased like this:
"...a changing external magnetic flux always induces current in a conducting coil that will generate an internal opposing magnetic flux and that flux will attempt to keep the total flux spanned by the conducting coil, constant". If it does not, e.g. because the coil is open, then the total magnetic flux spanned by the coil will not be maintained constant.
Notice, that the induced current has only ONE DIRECT CAUSE. Namely the external magnetic flux (Φ
EXT) which attempts to change the total flux penetrating the coil (Φ
TOT). The induction is not dependent on local magnetic flux densities (B) within the coil (only on its closed loop integral, which is flux). In Mathspeak:
Φ
TOT = Φ
EXT + Φ
INT In an ideal shorted inductor coil Φ
TOT always stays
constant regardless what the Φ
EXT is attempting to ...do and that implies that Φ
INT = -Φ
EXT ...a perfect and perpetual opposition of the internal flux to the external flux.
In a resistivity coil, the opposition is not perpetual and decays with time.