Does Dielectric Displacement Current generate a magnetic field?

[Dave45]

Transformer cores are constructed to eliminate eddy currents but what if you built one to accommodate and collect eddy currents.
Work with the system
www.olympus-ims.com/en/ndt-tutorials/eca-tutorial/what-is-eca/basic

[Dave45]

Eddy currents cause bemf in a dc pulsed coil

[Dave45]

Wind a coil on a welding rod then position welding rods around the circumference of the coil then wind a coil on top of the rods then more rods then another coil, repeat, repeat.

What happens, the eddy currents circulating in the coils magnify the magnetic field every layer, work with the structure of the field.

[SolarLab]

Hi there
Here is my take on the issue.
In order to try to address your question, the question should be properly defined.
1, If your question is based on the Maxwell displacement current then "Maxwell displacement current" either in vacuum or in dielectrics, neither generate magnetic field nor are sensitive to external magnetic fields. In other words current in dielectrics "The polarization current" does not act with potential forces on other currents and "external magnetic field" does not react with kinetic forces to the action of other currents.
2, Displacement current is a quantity appearing in Maxwell's equations that is defined in terms of the rate of change of electric displacement field. Displacement current has the units of electric current density, and it has an associated magnetic field just as actual currents do. However it is not an electric current of moving charges, but a time-varying electric field.
To conclude the above I quote from
"Harry McLaughlin" https://www.quora.com/profile/Harry-McLaughlin
a. A "changing" electric field CANNOT create a magnetic field
b. A "changing" magnetic field CANNOT create an electric field "end of quote"
3, The so-called "displacement current" term(1/4π)  ∂E/∂t  is not some current density generating magnetic field, as Maxwell supposed. This term gives information about the conduction currents which have been interrupted in the neighborhood of the reference point.
4, For what it worth, we cannot measure magnetic field produced by displacement currents but we can measure exactly the field of the interrupted conduction currents. Even if the details are not so obvious and require a skill to understand but what the equations imply is that the electric and magnetic fields depend only on the source charges. It is our orientation relative to the source charges and their motions that give rise to the details of the fields we measure.

From Maxwell basic equations the only sensible is the existence of ε0 and µ0
∂E/∂x=-Z0 ϵ0  ∂E/∂t
∂H/∂x=-μ0/Z0 ∂H/∂t

And they express that the E field causes the E Filed and The H field causes the H field
WAW what a discovery!!!!

The Equations only express that E and H fields are co-existent, co-substantial, and co-eternal like any two perpendicular sides of a brick neither the length affects the width or the other way around.

Hope it helps
jj

F.Y.I.

IMHO you are definitely on the "right track!" 

However consider/explain this: A CRT TV tube uses a "gun" structure to create a fast (HV) electron beam that moves towards a phosphorous coated "screen" to form the picture (glowing pixels); and this beam is steered using magnetic fields (the yoke coils)?

Also consider: An RF "Slotted Line" technique (an older but common RF Test and Measurement Instrument) - e.g. two parallel wires spaced close together; a generator at one end and a termination at the far end. If the line is impedance matched at the far end, with respect to the generator sine wave frequency, there is no reflection (narrow band). If the far end termination is a short; current is at maximum (minus line losses) and voltage is at minimum. If the far end termination is open; voltage is maximum and current is minimum. In all cases, except a matched termination, a "Standing Wave" (VSWR for example) will appear along the line, max and min are sub-multiples of the test frequency. It gets a bit more complicated when a "pulse" is used since the pulse contains multiple sine waves (see Fourier analysis).

A "piece-wise linear model" of this parallel wire yields: the conductors are modeled by placing many inductors along the line(s) and between these lines the model contains many capacitors connecting the two lines (the impedance formed between the lines is a complex number consisting of Resistance, Inductance and Capacitance with respect to Frequency and the physical characteristics of the lines and the adjacent environment. It becomes difficult at best to "guess analyze" the characteristics and performance (even when using a Smith Chart and simple coaxial or twin lead lines).

Basics: initially consider how a capacitor, an inductor and a resistance will respond to both voltage (potential difference) and current (movement of charge - and associated magnetic field) with respect to time (t~0 through many cycles or pulses).

Now consider one or more helical coils of conductive wire (a slow wave structure); fed by either or both a sine wave and a high voltage pulse; while also considering the signals velocity of propagation through the system; electron velocity modulation (kinetic energy); the systems impedance changes along the line and terminations; reflections (standing waves); and so forth... Add to this task the fact that  for nearly a hundred years we've used incorrect/incomplete Maxwell's equations which do not consider a Longitudinal wave (a.k.a Scalar) electromagnetic component.

From what I know, Displacement Current is the "gotcha" of Maxwell's equations. It's the "thing" that has no logical/mathematical solution via present day theory (or at least trying to get a good engineering answer from the guru's has yet proved elusive). Someone here mentioned "Tetryonic" theory - it may or may not be a good postulation, time will bare it out, but it is well worth a detailed review/study in my opine.

jj good stuff - [beware of Harry however] - check out Dr./Prof. Constantine Meyl...

FIN

[SolarLab]

F.Y.I.

Sorry, forgot an interesting reference and answer the first sentence:

http://agni.phys.iit.edu/~vpa/electromagnetic.html

Quote from within the above:

"Why not use magnets (instead of electric fields) to accelerate the beam? The force that the electric charge (beam) feels due to a magnetic field is always perpendicular to path the charge follows. Since the magnetic force always acts at right angles to the motion of a charge, it can only turn the charge, it cannot do work on the charge. So, electric fields, which can be oriented to act parallel to the motion of the particles, are used to accelerate particles. Although a particle accelerator complex often has many magnets, these are used not to increase the beam energy, but to control the direction of motion of the particles, pointing or focusing the beam.

Explaining this with a simple analogy, imagine the chair in which you are sitting. You want to roll across the room. The chair is pushing you with an upward force, while you are naturally pushing against it with a downward force. This upward force is perpendicular to the direction you want to go. In order to go across the room, you need another force that will push you parallel to the floor, i.e. perpendicular to the normal force of the chair. You still want the have the force of the chair as well, to keep you off the floor/carpet itself (because dragging on the carpet really burns). Now replace yourself with a small particle, replace the chair with a magnetic field, and replace the person nice enough to push you across the room with an electric field. Now you have a simplified acceleration situation, except in the acceleration process, the beam is propelled to travel because of an electric potential difference, or voltage difference, due to an electric field."

FIN