Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

[MileHigh]

Chris:

Well, I shot down your "doers" argument and you are the one that is on the flat Earth.

The majority of your references did NOT support your assertions and I call it "Orwellian madness" when you state that they do.  Here you are trying to "teach" on your YouTube channel and it's revealed that you don't know what you are talking about.  I don't go onto a sewing forum and talk a bunch of BS about sewing because I barely know anything about sewing!!!  You should follow suit.  Don't become another Daniel Nunez.

MileHigh

[tinman]

That's just

North and south don't even exist, they are just a naming convention.  You entered this thread believing that they existed and that there was a Bloch wall between the "north half" and the "south half" of a magnet.  Are you any wiser now I wonder or are you just going to continue bluffing your way through?

In all fairness MH,to use the terms north and south is just as correct as useing conventional current flow-even though it is the opposite to true current flow. Thing is,no one can tell us what the arrows show on the field lines that dont exist in everyday pictures of the magnetic field around a magnet-but every one is happy to except them. Some say the arrows drawn on the field lines are suppose to represent flow direction-->flow direction of what? Some say they represent the direction of force--> a magnetic field has no set direction of force.

It seems all well and good for the(so called) !know all! scientist to place lines around a magnet to represent the magnetic field,but when i draw my lines that sepperate the TWO different fields around a magnet ,and show where each individual field is strongest,every one of the guru's say thats crap. Well,to bad,my mapping of the two different fields dose form a figure 8 pattern relative to the magnetic field strength of each individual field-north and south.

Looking at the conventional magnetic field depiction below,it is clear that it is wrong. This crap about some flow of some thing that no one knows what the hell it is,is wrong. Something changes mid point in the field,and what ever that change is,it is opposite to that of the opposite side. So the arrows showing this continual unidirectional flow of some yet to be discovered matter-->are wrong. There are NO definitive explinations as to how or why a magnetic field dose what it dose-->as usual,there are only theories,and theories are only best guesses. The very same stands true for gravity--two masses atract each other . That's good,and is correct,but why?.  Us knowing all about magnetic fields because a CRT screen work's,or im on my computor because we know all about magnetic field's,is just pure rubbish. We know that 1 mass is attracted to another due to gravitational forces as well,and heavy shit stays on the ground because of this,but do we know how or why gravity dose what it dose-->no,but we still have stuff that works because of it.

So ,until some one can show(with actual proof) how and why a magnetic field dose what it dose,and what it actually is,then everyone has the right to put forth there argument,and no one has the right to say there wrong. Scientist make up shit all the time,only to find later that they got it all wrong-but it sticks anyway(conventional current flow).

[MarkE]

MileHigh - There are two types of people in this world, talkers and doers!


Talkers can not come to any conclusions other than what they read!

Doers have Intuition, common-sense and a Native Intelligence. My experiments have led me to believe what I believe. No matter how much "Talk" you "Talk", simply, you have not provided a single bit of evidence to the contrary!

"Doing" without understanding may provide hours of entertainment but not enlightenment.  When one performs an experiment and arrives at conclusions that are contrary to thousands, even millions of prior experiments have confirmed, the "doer" has a huge amount of evidence to overcome.  When a "doer" refuses to even listen to explanations of the understanding that those prior experiments have led to, then the "doer" is the proverbial ostrich with its head stuck firmly in the ground.  Why should anyone regard the "doer's" experiments superior to the experiments of the past?

What sad and incomplete evidence you have come up with, I have proved, References, Video, supporting Documentation, that has shown you to be incorrect.

If you are still denying the reality that is indisputably in front of you then you are still doing a put on or worse.

You asked for a debate, you failed to support your debate! Period!

Others here have shown enough to prove there is something going on at the Equator, their work also supports my experiments!

No, you have been refuted at each turn, even by your own references.  All experimenters agree that when the Hall effect sensor is placed parallel to the dipole that the flux density smoothly changes from a maximum in one direction at one pole to an opposing maximum in the other direction at the opposite pole.  There is no boundary condition at the dipole midpoint.  There si therefore no evidence of a Bloch wall at the dipole midpoint.  There is no evidence of flux curling inward towards the dipole at the dipole midpoint.  Quite the opposite, the evidence all points to the conventional view that flux is most parallel to the dipole axis at the dipole midpoint.

MileHigh, You have your opinion, I have mine, You think I am wrong, I think youre wrong.

I wonder if you can agree, to disagree?

With a mountain of evidence gained over 200 years running against you, you are simply and irrefutably in the wrong.

1: In magnetism, a domain wall is an interface separating magnetic domains.

Yes

2: A magnetic domain is a region within a magnetic material which has uniform magnetization.

Yes

3: A Bloch wall is a narrow transition region at the boundary between magnetic domains, over which the magnetization changes from its value in one domain to that in the next, named after the physicist Felix Bloch.

Yes, and more usually between domains that are oriented at 90, 180, or 270 degrees to each other.

I believe there is a polarisation difference between North and South. How about you be an adult and stop criticizing others for their Intuition and grow up!

What is that supposed to mean?  If we cut a magnet in half we just end up with a weaker magnet.  If we slice a magnet into three, we just end up with three weaker magnets.  We do not end up with a south monopole, a regular magnet, and a north monopole.

Your Actions here have brought about definitions that fit with your Dogma! Don't like being defined, then here's an idea, live and let live! Be an Adult!

It is you who refuse to acknowledge the reality that you call dogma while hanging onto ideas that your own references refute.

If you're afraid of sailing off the edge of the Earth because of the Flat Earth Theory? Then Don't go Sailing!

But it is you who keep repeating things that goes against your own evidence.

[MileHigh]

Tinman:

n all fairness MH,to use the terms north and south is just as correct as useing conventional current flow-even though it is the opposite to true current flow. Thing is,no one can tell us what the arrows show on the field lines that dont exist in everyday pictures of the magnetic field around a magnet-but every one is happy to except them. Some say the arrows drawn on the field lines are suppose to represent flow direction-->flow direction of what? Some say they represent the direction of force--> a magnetic field has no set direction of force.

The analogy for north and south breaks down.  For example, when Mark showed two bar magnets with a small gap between them, you talked about the north and south fields in that gap.  The analogy breaks down, and sticking to the analogy was confusing you.  TK or Itsu followed the magnetic field from the north pole all the way to the south pole rotating the Hall sensor appropriately so it always showed the same "polarity" (really flux direction) and you objected to that.  You said the north can't go all the way to the south.  That's where the analogy broke down again again.  They were just following the direction of the flux, no north, no south, just the direction of the flux.  So the real thing to do is understand the convention for north and south and also understand magnetic flux and use the right terms appropriate to the situation.  Where is the "north" inside a toroid?  There is none, so you start out by talking about the flux inside a toroid and completely ignore the concepts of "north" and "south."  Talking about "north" and "south" in the context of a toroid would itself be confusing.

The magnetic field has direction, there is no "flow."   People see arrows and they start to think of flow.  The arrows only indicate direction.

You say "direction of what?"  If you are standing next to a hot stove, can you determine the direction of the infra-red heat if you are blindfolded?  You sure as hell can by moving around and noting the intensity of the radiation on your skin.  So the magnetic field has a definable direction at any point in space.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Lets have a look at the picture below-for those that believe that there are not two different fields in a magnet.

We have two identical inductors with two long thin cores that protude into the magnetic field-at the same point either side of the center of the dipole(dipole-1.a pair of equal and oppositely charged or magnetized poles separated by a distance).The arrows on the magnetic field lines depict some sort of flow direction/or force direction of an unknown substance-yet to be discovered. Now these arrows pass through the core material in the same direction at the same point-BUT the sinewaves produced by the identical inductors are totally opposite-180 out of phase with each other. This clearly shows the arrow depiction/flow direction and force direction are not from one end of the dipole to the other. This shows us two opposite forces passing through the inductors cores. There IS two different fields around a magnet-not one,and these two fields/forces gradually cancel one another out as we get to the center of the magnets TWO pole ends-->the dipole.