Faraday's Paradox experiment

[Rosemary Ainslie]

what if we had like a .. Copper Sphere.
with a ring magnet inside of it.

and rotate the whole thing.. like a globe.

Hi guys.  I just dipped in here.  I've been following this thread off and on.  I just want to point out in that video link by Harvey - that if the field is divorced from the material of the magnet and simply 'orbits' around it - or manifests around it - then it would not be moved if the magnet is spun as shown in that video.  In other words it is simply and entirely divorced from the material of the magnet itself. 

I don't see this as a paradox.  I see it as proof that the field is - indeed - independent of the magnet itself.  Free floating - if you see what I mean.  It's orbit is trapped within the material of the magnet - it belongs to the magnet - yet it, itself is 'free floating'.  In point of fact this may be a kind of 'proof' that the magnetic field is fundamental, possibly material in origin, and NOT reliant on an electromagnetic interactions to manifest.  That would be my conclusion - in any event.  A fundamental force?

And - that it is not effected by the Earth's magnetic field is further proof that one magnetic field is shielded.  It's able to retain its structure against another magnetic field provided only that it's own orbiting fields are NOT broken.

Anyway.  Yet again.  That's how I see it.

Regards,
Rosemary

Not sure if any of that's clear.  Let's see if this question explains it better.  If the magnetic field is simply independent of the actual atomic structure of the magnet and if it were moving through the magnet and around it without interacting with the atomic structure of the magnet - then why would it be moved when the magnet is twisted?  No reason to anticipate such a response.

?  Hope that does it.   

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi all.
Here is my test on Faraday's Paradox.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlUY3snoWI8
It clearly shows that the field does not rotate with the ring magnet.
Cheers
Scotty

And Scotty - your early questions here.  I have one for you.  What happens when you place some iron or some magnetisable material on the drill head?  I suspect you'd get the magnet to rotate.  It's when you induce fields through space that one can get a sympathetic response.  Otherwise it's my belief that in a permanent magnetic field one has actually separated some kind of magnetic material or magnetic field - from it's previous housing or 'abodes' inside the magnet.

Of interest here is this.  If this is true then it should be possible to see material separation of some sort within the magnet itself.  I have tested this on neodymium magnets - a cylnidrical bar magnet - and found a small hollow in its centre.  I've never cut a ferrite type magnet but suspect that this may not be so evident as I believe these magnets are constructed under pressure without heat.  I think it needs heat to allow the material rearrangement of the cyrstalline structures.  That literally opens up the hollow which somehow relates to the mass of this field.  Sorry if this is obtuse.  It's the best I can do to explain it.

Regards,
Rosemary

[sm0ky2]

@ Rose

Ed Leedskalnin talked about this. he caled it "the space the tiny magnets were in" when the metal was hot, and under a magnetic field.

the field is in motion all the time, but its not the same kind of motion that physical matter endures, if that makes any sense.
When you turn the magnet, the field does actually turn "with it".
(personally i think i have scientifically proven that the field propegates faster than you turn it, but there are those that would argue against that to the death of them..)

the field presented in the HPG is what we consider "uniform", that is, on the macro-scale out here where we sit, the field presents an ~ equal force around any given concentric circle, around the common axis. the effect of this is that the effective field represents a "stationary" event in the space it occupies.

so, when one says "the feild does not move", in a newtonian sense, they are correct. Which is what matters to us, when we actually USE it.

If we zoom in, we can see that the outer extremities of the field are not uniform. despite our best efforts to create a perfectly symetrical disk, (nanostructures omitted), we are not perfect.

It presents itself in a "jagged-line" motion around the extremities.
and "streaks" around the face

this is important to us when we actually STUDY it.

It's not the moving field that matters, its the changes in the moving field. were it a perfectly symmetrical magnet, we could not detect its movement at all.

the field passes through everything,
its not the movement of the field that affects us,
its the movement of changes in the field.

If those changes are too subtle for us to observe on a grand scale, then for our purpose, the thought that it doesnt move can have the same result as an approach with the knowledge that it does.

If you talk to an Engineer he tells you that electrons flow. Talk to a technician, he tells you no they dont, Current flows.
and the two of them can sit at a coffee table and argue the point for days..  meanwhile, you push the button and your computer still turns on.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Think about this, the Earth. if you look at the geological data, study the movement of the core, and the coesponding shifts in the earths magnetic field. you see that it moves right through us and we dont even notice it. we dont see wrenches flying across the garage, and such...  these changes are very small compared to us.

but take for instance a Goose. whos brain posses a tiny cluster of crystals that oscillate in a vectoral direction associated with the earths field. These changes throw the goose patterns off by hundreds of miles.

its all relative really..
When it comes to this device, and the manner in which it is used.
"the field is stationary".
a more accurate terminoligy, would be to say that
"the distortion in space the magnetic field creates, is stationary."

in either case, we dont see it moving in the HPG
so its esoteric or something.....

[sparks]

   If you take a coil and place it inside a conducting sphere when you energise the coil a magnetic field will be produced that is very consistent with the Earths magnetic field.   You can detect all sorts of magnetic poles produced by eddy currents in the sphere.  Free electrons will drift around magnetic field lines.  When you change the magnetic field line configuration they will try to drift around the magnetic field line they are tethered to.  Its like you are swinging a ball on the end of a rope.  When you walk east the electron rotation moves east with you.  The electron magnetic field tethers it to permeating magnetic field lines.  When the magnetic field lines shift you get electron movement.  Notice these are magnetic field lines.  In between the magnetic field lines there is still some sort of magnetic something.  Magnetic field lines appear at least to me like the isobars on a weather map.  This leads me to believe that the aether is comprised of a magnetic fluid.  Through this magnetic fluid any movements of matter are transmitted.  It is very evident there is inertia at play when we energise a coil of high self induction.   Nothing happens.  There is a phase shift between when we expect the current to flow and when it does.  Like the magnetic fluid didnt want to move and then when it did it kept moving.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Sm0ky

It's my opinion that you guys complicate things.  It's a measure of your intelligence - but it's actually not necessary.  The answer is simple - if Leedskalnin is right.  Effectively if everything actually just reduces to orbiting magnetic fields - then here's the thinking.

Assume that there's a dipole in a field.  Assume that we cannot detect that particle because it is too small and too fast.  Our most accurate measure of anything is light.  It's also the fastest thing we can use as a gauge to determine velocity.  Therefore if anything moved faster than light speed - and if it were also smaller - then light would not find it.  And, again, provided also, that it was always in motion.  Clearly if it were motionless then - sooner or later - a photon would interact with it.  I see this in the mind's eye as a tortoise trying to catch a rabbit. 

If that something - that orbiting field of dipoles - comprises a magnetic field - then it would behave exactly as it's shown to behave here.  The big leap - the great divide - is to acknowledge that there's any possibility that there's a material property to the magnetic field.  And then to acknowledge that if anything moved at greater than light speed - how on earth or in heaven - would we ever find it?  It would stay dark. 

Then you'll see there's a whole lot of paradoxes that become immediately explicable.  That's my argument.  Maybe - one day - I'll persuade you to dip in and look at the thesis here Sm0ky.  I'd be very glad of your input.

Kindest regards,
Rosie
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35909676/REVISION-OF-DARK-MATTER-MFM

edited