Eddy currents and their implications

[frankly]

I agree not seperatly for in a magnet you have two poles a both ends one moving into the magnet face and one moving away, Im sorry but I dont subscribe to the bloch wall theory that would imply that the pole of the electron or particle whatever we want to call it flips poles half way through the magnet I just dont see that happening.

I am not too sure what you mean there Dave. Could you expand or clarify please?

I meant, that with one wire, if you wave the end of a magnet toward the wire, you get energy, and as you go past and out the other side, you get the inverse. Not the reverse, for that would be South pole energy, or what comes from rotating the magnet past the single wire. This is called pulsed DC I think. Correct me if I am wrong please.

Frankly.

[MotovilovDN]

May be that will help for understand to magnet`s wave process:
In my Russian application for an invention used by BTG mechanism for the formationof monopoles, which is now modeled by physicists in Switzerland:

http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v7/n1/full/nphys1794.html

Magnetic monopoles have been predicted to occur as emergent fractional quasiparticles inside pyrochlore spin ice, a frustrated magnetic insulator. Experimental signatures of such emergent monopoles accompanied by Dirac strings have been detected by means of neutron scattering in reciprocal space in pyrochlore spin ice at sub-Kelvin temperatures, but their real-space observation has remained elusive. Here we report on direct, real-space observations of emergent monopoles and their associated Dirac strings in two-dimensional (2D) artificial kagome spin ice at room temperature using synchrotron X-ray photoemission electron microscopy. Magnetization reversal proceeds through the nucleation and avalanche-type dissociation of monopoleâ€"antimonopole pairs along 1D Dirac strings. This is in sharp contrast to conventional domain growth in 2D systems, providing a striking example of dimensional reduction due to frustration. The observed hysteresis, monopole densities and 1D Dirac-string avalanches are quantitatively explained by Monte Carlo simulations.

[frankly]

May be that will help for understand to magnet`s wave process:
In my Russian application for an invention used by BTG mechanism for the formationof monopoles, which is now modeled by physicists in Switzerland:

http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v7/n1/full/nphys1794.html

Magnetic monopoles have been predicted to occur as emergent fractional quasiparticles inside pyrochlore spin ice, a frustrated magnetic insulator. Experimental signatures of such emergent monopoles accompanied by Dirac strings have been detected by means of neutron scattering in reciprocal space in pyrochlore spin ice at sub-Kelvin temperatures, but their real-space observation has remained elusive. Here we report on direct, real-space observations of emergent monopoles and their associated Dirac strings in two-dimensional (2D) artificial kagome spin ice at room temperature using synchrotron X-ray photoemission electron microscopy. Magnetization reversal proceeds through the nucleation and avalanche-type dissociation of monopoleâ€"antimonopole pairs along 1D Dirac strings. This is in sharp contrast to conventional domain growth in 2D systems, providing a striking example of dimensional reduction due to frustration. The observed hysteresis, monopole densities and 1D Dirac-string avalanches are quantitatively explained by Monte Carlo simulations.

Hi MotovilovDN.

We have not spoken before, nor have I had much time to absorb the higher order mechanics you are obviously conversant with. I will, however, endeavour to if you wish. As a beginning, I looked up your previous links, which I absorbed a little of, and the recent post, which enlightened me a little more.

Then, I saw this last post and dived right in, only to get to here........"In pyrochlore spin ice, the monopoleâ€"antimonopole pairs are connected by a string of overturned dipoles, which is often called a Dirac string6, 19, 20, 21. In this context, the Dirac string is understood as a physical 1D object that feeds magnetic flux into the volume elements where the monopoles reside. The string was originally conceived by Dirac as a singular line in the vector potential, to describe the quantum motion of an electron in the (classical) field of a magnetic monopole".

Now, I think I touched upon the absurdity of using straight lines to explain circular motion earlier, but this does better justice.

How, in what manner, can the monopoles described "feed flux into the elements where the monopoles reside"? Via the Dirac string which is the result of the monopoles? This seems to me, a layman, like an oxymoron. An abberation. A self negating statement.

In other words, bullshit.

Sure it is wrapped in chocolate, but nevertheless, it sure tastes the same once bitten into.

Take, for example, the emergance of the the proton, from the interaction in the model from the first link. Where does this come from? "Created" From the colission? More of the same, I think.

Sorry, it just doesn't make sense yet.

Perhaps I am missing something fundamental.

Or else, you are.

Frankly.

[MotovilovDN]

Hi, Frankly.  Yes, that is very difficult, big scientific task...   

[frankly]

Hi, Frankly.  Yes, that is very difficult, big scientific task...   

My friend. It is not difficult. The reasons put forth do not make sense, and so, need to be replaced.

Vectors cannot describe arcs.

Simple.

Quaternions were originally used, and referred to by Tesla in his work. Only with circular motion, can the rotation path of the Eddy currents formed be described. Only with circles can matter be resolved. There is no reason to match the masses of the wide, short primary wind, with the long, narrow secondary, apart from the fact that the tail of the Eddy current, before it loops upon itself, intersects with the secondary, delivering momentum to the impressed voltage and amperage at the load, thereby retaining and sustaining the standing wave motion within the primary and allowing the power generated to be removed from the secondary without effecting the primary, providing certain limits are maintained.

Frankly.