Two kinds of induction - Henry

[nix85]

Ill use emojis as I see fit.    

I dont follow etheric smoke rings. I follow flux cutting for induction. 

To follow what you just quoted, then I would have to believe that a simple air core inductor windings fields do not cut the other windings in order to accomplish self inductance.


In a transformer, toroid, Ecore, etc., the fields are not totally contained in the core and there is flux cutting. When we look at just the field of a single straight wire and apply current, the field emanates from the wire itself. If we gradually bring a core near the powered wire, are you saying all of the wires field will just appear in the core and there will no longer be any field around the wire?

Below is a pdf of what I follow. In a toroid, all the induction action happens in the hole of the core. The flux from the primary crosses the hole of the core and induces the sec. The same for an Ecore from the center to the outer parts of the core. Its all pretty simple and your making it all too complex. What advantage do you have with your way compared to my way?  What can you do using your understanding vs my understanding that makes things any easier or help you do things that I cannot do?  Pretty much nothing really.

Brads vid is a sham.  Honestly if he did know that the magnet does as I explained it does, then he is also a liar.  If he didnt know at the time( some years ago) then he was clearly mistaken with his test and just didnt know any better at the time. Either way, what he has shown has nothing to do with fuzzy clouds that you embellish and has everything to do with the toroid winding altering the core speaker magnets field of which is inducing the voltage in the top secondary by way of flux cutting.

Show me the same experiment Brad had shown with just a normal ferite core nonmagnetized and your results on the secondary will never do what brad has shown. Cannot happen.  If you disagree, then show me. You will have to prove that the core is not a magnet.

Mags

first of all, that video is irrelevant, its just one of many examples, no need to to mention or try to defame that guy brad.

"To follow what you just quoted, then I would have to believe that a simple air core inductor windings fields do not cut the other windings in order to accomplish self inductance"

that totally does not follow from anything i said. with air core flux is not contained in the core, and it freely cuts the wires.

"In a transformer, toroid, Ecore, etc., the fields are not totally contained in the core and there is flux cutting"

that is almost totally untrue, its not even a question that magnetic field of the toroid is almost perfectly contained within itself, basic experiment with iron powder (which i already posted on first page) shows clearly field outside the toroid is zero for all pratical purposes, the very reason they are used for shielding in radio amps, eliminating the need for grounded metal cages.

same goes for transformer core unless there is an airgap or it has sharp corners (as most do) in which case SOME leakage does occur, but that happens not under the secondary and is by orders of magnitude too small to account even for a fraction of the induced voltage.

for all practical purposes it IS contained in the core, yet voltage is induced in the wires which never see that MAGNETIC flux....

and we came back to the more subtle energy, which u try to dodge but can never dodge it since it is mother and father of the so called magnetic field, the A-FIELD, the etheric substrata.

as for that troll, i dont believe or go by any videos, i go by centuries of hard research and reason.

[Magluvin]

Or maybe its like this below.

From the pdf of my last post


Mags

[Magluvin]

The text of the pdf explains the flux cutting version that answers many questions on this very subject.
I highly recommend the read. Goes into details of why and why not.  Took me a few reads to get a full grip. Once it sinks in.....

Mags

[nix85]

sure, few lines might leak, but, like i said, this could never account for the induced voltage, by orders of magnitude.

induction happens through more subtle force than what is called magnetism

[Magluvin]

sure, few lines might leak, but, like i said, this could never account for the induced voltage, by orders of magnitude.

induction happens through more subtle force than what is called magnetism

nooo!     not a few lines. Any flux that the core accepts crosses that hole in the core. The windings of say a primary on the left and a secondary on the right for visual purposes, all of the field of the primary that engages the core in full core loop, had to cross that hole. and in that hole are the parts of the winding that get the densest flux as the very outside parts of the toroid winding are not playing as big a part in the self induction and or mutual induction. There may be a lot of wasted wire in our windings causing more series resistance than we might know about. Probably the best core would be a completely enclosed core. Only openings for wire leads. Anyway..
Ive been through this discussion  but it was the E field that they claimed was the actual current flow inducing factor, not flux cutting. 

Thing for me about, well, all that, is it just isnt tangible for me. The only thing that is tangible is the magnetic field. The E field only appears when the flux is moving/changing but then when the flux becomes steady, these other fields are just not there. Cant see them. Cant measure them. I tend to believe they were created to cover up the flux cutting method for what ever reasons..

Here is an example...  Speakers have all sorts of specs. Vb. FR. Qts. Qes. Qms. Xmax, Inductance. Impedance. Resistance.  And finally 'Sensitivity'  A spec not many put mind to.  It is a substitute for the efficiency of the speaker by listing say 90b@1W 1 meter from the speaker. The slick coverup is the fact that they will not, maybe because the are told not to, express the actual efficiency of the speaker as an in/out rating.  Sound energy is also measured in watts(energy over time) and some speakers, like with 88.5db are around 0.5%eff. 96db is 2.5%eff.  Seems awful inefficient dont ya think? But if we find a speaker that is say 105db@1w we are now at 20%eff.  Well I have found 3 speakers that are rated at 112db@1W.  Guess what the eff is!!   100%eff!!!!   Hell no 'they' would not want anybody to know that. Especially not us here at the forums..   Now. Can we take that 100%eff speaker and improve on that??? I say absolutely.   If one could improve on that 112db to 114db, only a 2db difference, one would be at 158%eff!!    Get it? So yeah.    "No actual eff ratings on speakers please!"


Anyways, the spec is not something guys like us would ever consider in our game as the spec number really doesnt mean anything, until I thought about it and found actual eff calculations that make a great case for my argument.  If this is all true, then we should study these things as there is not one thing out there that is capable of 100%eff, that we know of, other than this.

So sure I can lean towards the idea that the completely invisible, undetectable fields that are associated with the magnetic field are just a way to hide something and lure us away from the truth.    For me, the idea of flux cutting and being able to visualize that in my plans for projects works well for me. These other fields, if they exist at all, will always fall inline with the attributes of the flux anyway. And it distorts our true understanding of how the flux acts and interacts with the windings, cores...

Oh.  Looky here.  114db W/m  158%eff
https://marathonpro.com/btbutw.html

Hmm... 118db 398%eff
https://nbninchico.en.made-in-china.com/product/HNIJhsjrXmWu/China-300Hz-10kHz-Neo-Professional-Horn-Tweeter-with-118dB-Sensitivity-90d-1.html

Lol. Imagine that scandal. Speakers will be banned!!     lol, never happen.


Mags