Faraday's Paradox experiment

[Rosemary Ainslie]

GB.  I've tried EVERYTHING.  I simply can't open that file.  Can you give another link - or explain what I'm doing wrong.

Sorry to impose.  I'm useless unless things are on youtube.

Regards,
Rosemary

[poynt99]

Something that may be worth looking at:

http://www.physics.umd.edu/lecdem/outreach/QOTW/arch11/q218unipolar.pdf

.99

[gravityblock]

GB.  I've tried EVERYTHING.  I simply can't open that file.  Can you give another link - or explain what I'm doing wrong.

Sorry to impose.  I'm useless unless things are on youtube.

Regards,
Rosemary

Here's a YouTube link, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbfTgGEtzg0
Additional information about the experiment done in the video, http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/

GB

[Airstriker]

I think there is too much tech talk in the paper!
Sure if you spin the disc you get current but not if you spin the magnet only!

Yyyyyyy....... NO ! Actually you will get current. In special setup.

I have seen the papers before that GB provided.  It's just a bunch of relativistic voodoo, (and special relativity is based on shaky foundations-- the two postulates assumed for it's foundation are wrong).
...
He tries to say that Faraday's law is flawed, but the truth is that Faraday's law is not flawed and always works 100% of the time when properly applied against the subject matter for which the law was created.

Ok Mr. Special MIT relativistic voodoo... Try to explain this with your 100% working Faraday's law:
http://www.physics.umd.edu/lecdem/outreach/QOTW/arch11/q218unipolar.pdf

As for rotating magnetic field - it's rotating but we cannot see it rotate Sounds strange but let me explain. Let's make it simple. Imagine an apple. A perfectly symmetrical apple (not round like a ball but symmetrical on one of it's axis). Now, let's rotate this apple around it's axis of symmetry. Try slow and fast rotation. When you look at it what do you see ? Do you see a rotating apple ? No you see a static apple. It's rotation doesn't affect the way you see it. It's always static for you.
Magnetic field lines, in fact look exactly the same like this symmetrical apple. This field lines make a perfect symmetrical "shell", so when you rotate the magnet you will not see any change, because this shell will always look the same for you. Conclusion - we're not able to see the rotating magnetic field, so looking at it relatively, we say it's not rotating.

As for GB's interesting experiment. Imagine a not perfectly symmetrical apple. Actually, imagine two not perfectly symmetrical apples. Make them rotate. What do you see? Hmmm... yes we can see them rotate. And if this two assymetrical objects interact with each other, they will actually act a set of two sprockets. If one of them rotates, the other one will also rotate. Just what we can see in the video.
And yes, the differences between these two apples (magnets) are very small - that's why you can only see them rotate when there is "no" friction - they are attached to strings. But there is a very simple experiment to confirm what I say without using strings and no friction environment. Take two big circular magnets. Place 2 (4) small magnets on every big magnet (they should be in attraction mode). If you do so, you will actually have two magnetic sprockets. Now take these two big magnets and hold them against each other (in attraction or repulsion mode - doesn't really matter). Now rotate one of the two big magnets. Will the other one rotate ? Yes it will (but check it yourself). How is it different than GB's experiment ?
The same theory applies to magnet - metal disc configuration. Just imagine a sprocket and a washer. A sprocket will not move (rotate) a washer.

All in all, GB's experiment has nothing to do with Faraday's Paradox. Anyway there is such thing as Faraday's Paradox and it has nothing to do with voodoo.

I personally like the following proven sentence:
"Faraday's Law is only valid if work is performed in bringing about the change in flux."
I also recommend reading this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_paradox

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Something that may be worth looking at:

http://www.physics.umd.edu/lecdem/outreach/QOTW/arch11/q218unipolar.pdf

.99

? Poynty ? is that really you?     WHAT A PLEASURE.  Welcome back from wherever it is that you've been.