|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Electromagnetic Forum » Our globe is a closed in space put the fire out!
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Me |
 Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Electromagnetism
The reasoning below shows that there is no magnetic field it is a false
concept. Iron filings are not an indication of strength at all. It is a
fallacy.
This theory is based around the special theory of relativity and the
relative motion of electrons and fixed charges in a conductor.
With alternating current the electrons are accelerating and generate photons
at the exciting frequency and this radiation is responsible for other
aspects of electromagnetism. This includes the induction of current in one
conductor by alternating current in another.
Electromagnetism theory reached its pinnacle in the nineteenth century with
Maxwell's famous equations.
Let us take two examples.
The case of two parallel conductors carrying current
1. Currents parallel.
The current is a slow movement of electrons with fixed positive charges.
The electrons are moving parallel in the two wires so are stationary
relative to each other. The positive charges are seen as moving. According
to Einstein's theory of relativity the length of the positive charge is
contracted as seen by the electrons and so the electrons see an increased
charge density over the charge density of the electrons. This makes the
force of attraction between unlike charges slightly greater than the force
of repulsion between unlike charges. This means that there is a net force of
attraction.
2. Currents anti-parallel.
The electrons are now moving anti-parallel and so they see a length
contraction of the other electron charge. The positive charges are also
seen contracted but not as much. So the electrons are seen as having a
greater charge density than the fixed positive charges. Thus the force of
repulsion of like charges is greater than the force of attraction of unlike
charges. This means there is a net force of repulsion.
Induction
Consider two conducting wires parallel. One conductor has an alternating
current flowing in it. This means that the electrons are changing their
energy and emit photons at the exciting frequency these are emitted in
random directions like a messenger with the energy change and momentum
(angular and linear) and these are absorbed by electrons in another
conductor nearby and this information is transferred by photon collision to
make the electrons in the other wire move thus inducing an current.
In all these cases no magnetic field was required to account for the
phenomena involved. So invoking Occum's razor, the magnetic field in not
required and so does not exist. Consider two long straight copper conductors
each carrying the same current in the same direction. The electrons move
together at the same velocity in each cable. They repel one another. The
fixed positive charges repel each other. However the electrons wire A
attract the fixed charges in wire B but because the electrons are moving
relative to the fixed charges they will see a higher charge density than the
charge density due to the electrons in B so the attraction of electrons to
fixed positive charges is higher than the repulsion between the
same number of electrons in B. Similarly for electrons in wire B and the
fixed positive charges in wire A. n=number of atoms per meter e=electronic
charge d=separation l=length P=permittivity v=drift velocity of electrons
c=velocity of light
The force of repulsion is P*2*((e*n)^2)*l /d (= F)
And the force of attraction is P*(2*((e*n)^2)*l/d)/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)
So the resultant force is F-F/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)=F(1-1/sqr(1-(v/c)^2))
=F(1-(1-(v/c)^2)^(-1/2))
=F(1-(1+(1/2)(v/c)^2))
= F(v/c)^2/2
= (P*2*((e*n)^2)*l/d)(v/c)^2/2
= (P/c)*(((e*n*v)^2)*l/d)
=(P/c)*i^2*l/d (e*n*v=i)
So P/c is the "permeability" and the force is proportional to the current
squared and the length but inversely proportional to the separation. There
is no need for the idea of the magnetic field. There is no magnetic field
Experimental Test
Karl Popper has explained the scientific method. Use the predictions of the
theory and test experimentally when judging a philosophical idea.
Science in only science if you carry out experiments to test the theories of
yourself or another to play philosophical games with words and equations is
not science.
Go get a bit of wire make a straight part 40 cm long and connect it to a
constant current source of say 1 amp.
Get the old electrostatic kit out of the 18th century box and using a glass
rod wiped with silk make a pith ball coated with gold leaf charged by
bringing the glass rod close to the ball and touch the ball briefly with a
finger. The ball will be repelled by the glass rod.
Put the pith ball (suspended by a silk thread from a curved glass stand)
near the wire and note the deflection from the vertical when the current is
switched on.
I predict it will be repelled if negatively charged and attracted if
positively charged. (confirmed)
A bar magnet is in fact a group of spinning electrons which are coupled by
spin-spin interactions (Quantum mechanics) that are mediated by virtual
photons again a force that is electronic and connected to the Lorenz
contraction.. The force on another bar magnet is actually due to spin-spin
interactions (Quantum mechanics) which is electronic and related to the
Lorenz contraction. A loop of wire carrying a current is again interacting
with another current carrying conductor by the electrostatic force (mediated
by virtual photons) and is again a result of the Lorenz contraction. The
calculation to use is the biot-savart hypothesis (force between current
elements) integrated. In view of this new insight we should re-name
magnetism as the "Lorenz force". It also means that many of our reasoning
based on observations made 300 years ago before Einstein developed his
special theory of relativity are misconceived as they are based on the wrong
model.
The Gaussian construction of magnetic shells does not come into it there is
no magnetic flux or lines of force.
As a disclaimer I will point out that I am not the first or only person to
point this out.
Unfortunately the people in power put their income first and the result of
their selfishness will be the extinction of humanity by suffocation and
global warming.
The royal family's selfishness has poisoned the earth.
All they want is "Your money"
Our room (the globe) is fixed, we are burning a fire, put it out or we will
die of suffocation. That is sensible. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Autymn D. C. |
| Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Magnetism is by definition. The Lorentz contraction is irrelevant for
drift velocities. Elèctròns do not spin but whorl and trend. Your
wire is a capacitor-inductor and holds a charge.
-Aut |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Me |
| Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Rubbish
"Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1169060821.364499.180790@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Magnetism is by definition. The Lorentz contraction is irrelevant for
drift velocities. Elèctròns do not spin but whorl and trend. Your
wire is a capacitor-inductor and holds a charge.
-Aut |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| davee |
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:30 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
tangent: "start at zero continuous space the ultimate
superconductor.There are no potential differences anywhere and
therefore no time and heat. Call this dark matter and is mutually
exclusive to any Quantum disturbance. photon of light: (particle wave
theory of matter.) Inertia , TEM waves. A single quantum disturbance
could have created all we see. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Autymn D. C. |
| Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| davee |
| Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ask the string theorists, ask the inflation theorists, ask the loop
quantum gravity theorists, I only make comments on stuff I know
absolutely nothing about. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| davee |
| Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:20 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Think of a Rubik cube or Newtons cradle. If you displace one piece you
must displace another. If the second piece did not return to original
position then another piece has moved and so on. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
