On May 5, 10:57 pm, Benj <bjac... at (no spam) iwaynet.net> wrote:

OK. Let me pick your brains. I'm working on the age-old question does
a magnetic field rotate with the magnet if you spin it.

Assuming you are spinning the magnet around an axis of cylindrical
symmetry: no. There is no concept of a rotating geometrically
invariant field.

Which doesn't mean the field as described in normal
terms will not change. That's a different question --

and you are
free to think of the new field as a "rotating magnetic field" if you
like -- nobody can stop you.

Much ado about nothing.

"Kevin G. Rhoads" <kgrho... at (no spam) alum.mit.edu> wrote in messagenews:4829B4F0.AEDF7778 at (no spam) alum.mit.edu...

| The Earth's magnetic field does not move with the Earth out to arbitrary
| distances.

Yes it does, we are only concerned here with 24,000 miles.
See thread title, the field rotates with the magnet.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif

Benj wrote:

OK. Let me pick your brains.  I'm working on the age-old question does
a magnetic field rotate with the magnet if you spin it.  People have
established that if you put a loop near a Faraday generator and spin
the magnet you get no voltage. Some have taken this as proof that the
magnetic field does not rotate with the magnet. But others have shown
that the voltage induced in a loop this way is zero because the
voltage in the front side of the loop is exactly canceled by the back
side of the loop. Hence one person has even formulated a "law" that
says you cannot ever determine if the field rotates IF you only use
CLOSED loops!

[snip crap]

Given an axially symmetric dipole magnetic field, what does "rotate"
mean when the symmetry axis is the rotation axis?  Are you implying
that lines of force are physical entities that can flow through a coil
and entrain charge?
----------------------

Benj
(who notes that answering the rotating magnet question is a "good
first step" toward finding that precise arrangement of magnets that
will produce "free energy"!) :)


Idiot.

   1) Time is homogeneous.

   2) Noether's theorem
   3) Mass-energy is locally conserved.

| The Earth's magnetic field does not move with the Earth out to arbitrary
| distances.

Yes it does, we are only concerned here with 24,000 miles.

With all due disrespect you are flat out wrong.
Got evidence? Try disproving all the data shown on various

On May 13, 12:03 am, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

So yes, a (conductive) Beanstalk will definitely carry a current.

Didn't they launch a "beanstalk" satellite a while back but the thing
failed because the rope (conductive) broke?

Benj may feel cheated; I suggest he research the Homopolar Generator
and variants.

Tell it to Faraday! It was data and questions that came from Faraday
studying (and inventing) the Homopolar generator that started this
whole thing. My feeling was that by now in the 21 century answering
his questions should at least be possible if not "easy".

And yes, the question of does the earth's field rotate with the planet
(or maybe its core) is the same one.

If you are going to snip, wanker, I will too.
Now behave or fuck off, a field rotates with a magnet

----------------------------"n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message

news:26e498a3-e8c6-43b6-b22d-54e6d6337156 at (no spam) n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...

On May 14, 5:42 am, Benj <bjac... at (no spam) iwaynet.net> wrote:
On May 13, 12:03 am, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

So yes, a (conductive) Beanstalk will definitely carry a current.

Didn't they launch a "beanstalk" satellite a while back but the thing
failed because the rope (conductive) broke?

Weighted tether hanging off a shuttle burned through because of all
the current. Consider shuttle orbital velocity...

Benj may feel cheated; I suggest he research the Homopolar Generator
and variants.

Tell it to Faraday! It was data and questions that came from Faraday
studying (and inventing) the Homopolar generator that started this
whole thing. My feeling was that by now in the 21 century answering
his questions should at least be possible if not "easy".

Seen this?

http://depalma.pair.com/Absurdity/Absurdity10/ElectricalScienceWrong....

I'm not recommending it either yea or nay, only presenting it as
maybe pertinent.

Bottom line though is as usual; build it and see. Not as difficult
as you might think either:

http://dangerouslyfun.com/homopolar-motor

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/971400/unexplained_phenomenon_simplest_...

Variations are limited only by your imagination and ability to
visualize what you want to happen.

And yes, the question of does the earth's field rotate with the planet
(or maybe its core) is the same one.

Yep!

Mark L. Fergerson

---------------
Unfortunately there is nothing in your references (except DePalma's lack of
basic understanding) that violate any basic principles.

The spiral hides the
operating part (for more pizazz) of the device in one display but the
alternative construction in another doesn't. If you don't like Faraday,
Coulomb's force law is quite applicable. There is no mystery or unexplained
phenomena in a homopolar machine. Note also that "flux cutting" is somewhat
of a misleading and antiquated concept as is the idea of "lines of flux".

There is no mystery or unexplained
phenomena in a homopolar machine. Note also that "flux cutting" is somewhat
of a misleading and antiquated concept as is the idea of "lines of flux".

On May 14, 5:42 am, Benj <bjac... at (no spam) iwaynet.net> wrote:
On May 13, 12:03 am, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

So yes, a (conductive) Beanstalk will definitely carry a current.

Didn't they launch a "beanstalk" satellite a while back but the thing
failed because the rope (conductive) broke?

Weighted tether hanging off a shuttle burned through because of all
the current. Consider shuttle orbital velocity...

Benj may feel cheated; I suggest he research the Homopolar Generator
and variants.

Tell it to Faraday! It was data and questions that came from Faraday
studying (and inventing) the Homopolar generator that started this
whole thing. My feeling was that by now in the 21 century answering
his questions should at least be possible if not "easy".

Seen this?

http://depalma.pair.com/Absurdity/Absurdity10/ElectricalScienceWrong.html

I'm not recommending it either yea or nay, only presenting it as
maybe pertinent.

Bottom line though is as usual; build it and see. Not as difficult
as you might think either:

http://dangerouslyfun.com/homopolar-motor

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/971400/unexplained_phenomenon_simplest_electric_motor/

Variations are limited only by your imagination and ability to
visualize what you want to happen.

And yes, the question of does the earth's field rotate with the planet
(or maybe its core) is the same one.

Yep!


Mark L. Fergerson
---------------

On May 11, 3:03 pm, Edward Green <spamspamsp... at (no spam) netzero.com> wrote:

On May 5, 10:57 pm, Benj <bjac... at (no spam) iwaynet.net> wrote:

OK. Let me pick your brains.  I'm working on the age-old question does
a magnetic field rotate with the magnet if you spin it.

Assuming you are spinning the magnet around an axis of cylindrical
symmetry: no.  There is no concept of a rotating geometrically
invariant field.

What in the world do you mean "there is no concept"?  Of course the is
a "Concept"!!!   Faraday  himself raised the "concept" in examining
his homopolar generator. I take it you mean that one does not speak of
the problem in polite physics company because they are still trying to
sweep the problem under the physic rug.

Which doesn't mean the field as described in normal
terms will not change.  That's a different question --

Agreed.

and you are
free to think of the new field as a "rotating magnetic field" if you
like -- nobody can stop you. ;-)

Spoken like a true physicist!  Of course I can imagine a field doing
anything I wish!  That doesn't make my idea real!  Who do you think I
am? Aut?  My world, apparently unlike yours is determined by
experiment and data rather than my own thoughts on how I think it
should work. You must be a cosmologist....

... right

Much ado about nothing.

Faraday didn't think so and I don't either. The answer has a lot to do
with the understanding of several things including the Faraday
generator and the "beanstalk" device.

I say "geometrically invariant" because a bar magnet rotated about one
of its minor axes generates would could plausibly be called a
"rotating magnetic field".

You are making some very extensive assumptions about who I am and what
I think based on insufficient data, and you missed my point.

I asserted -- and again, maybe I am even correct -- that while
conventionally we would not describe the magetic field of a bar magnet
rotating about its major axis a "rotating magnetic field", we seem to
agree that even in conventional terms the field would still be
modified from that of the non-rotating bar magnetic, and you could, I
say, consider the resulting field configuration as a rotating version
of the first one, if that floats your boat.

I don't think you will succeed in adding anything to the conventional
EM treatment of fields by adding in terms for "rate of rotation" -- as
opposed to merely adding in words to the effect that this field
configuration is a rotating version of that one -- though I could be
wrong.

It's possible that Faraday's understanding has been overtaken by more
modern notation and concepts.

Magnetic fields have a great deal to do with rotation already, I will
grant you that. We might notice the coriolis equivalent description
of the Lorentz force law -- it _looks_ as if a magnetic field is a
local rotation seen by charged particles.

I should have said, there is no concept of a rotating but otherwise
geometrically invariant magnetic field under maxwell's equations.
That's what I meant to say, and that's my assertion.

Maybe it is even correct.
[cut]
I asserted -- and again, maybe I am even correct -- that while
conventionally we would not describe the magetic field of a bar magnet
rotating about its major axis a "rotating magnetic field", we seem to
agree that even in conventional terms the field would still be
modified from that of the non-rotating bar magnetic, and you could, I
say, consider the resulting field configuration as a rotating version
of the first one, if that floats your boat.

OK. Let me pick your brains. I'm working on the age-old question does
a magnetic field rotate with the magnet if you spin it. People have
established that if you put a loop near a Faraday generator and spin
the magnet you get no voltage. Some have taken this as proof that the
magnetic field does not rotate with the magnet. But others have shown
that the voltage induced in a loop this way is zero because the
voltage in the front side of the loop is exactly canceled by the back
side of the loop. Hence one person has even formulated a "law" that
says you cannot ever determine if the field rotates IF you only use
CLOSED loops!
The following link is not on this subject, however, I do believe it relates