Faraday's Paradox experiment

[wings]

@ 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.....

Figure 12: Photograph of 50.8mm ring magnet with the north pole facing the
camera with different color LEDs around the perimeter of the lens.

http://sirzerp.blip.tv/#1468250
http://www.nanomagnetics.us/

.... The Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field

[gravityblock]

Figure 12: Photograph of 50.8mm ring magnet with the north pole facing the
camera with different color LEDs around the perimeter of the lens.

http://sirzerp.blip.tv/#1468250
http://www.nanomagnetics.us/

.... The Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field

Here's a quote from Sirzerp in regards to his publication on Photographing Magnetic Lines of Constant Scaler Potential, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28943933/Photographing-Magnetic-Lines-of-Constant-Scalar-Potential , "I should stress the lines that we have photographed are not B- field flux lines, but instead a form of magnetic ‘voltage’ equipotential lines."

Using a lens  with a micron thin layer of sandwiched ferro fluid to map external magnetic fields via optic affects of the field on the magnetic fluid. Red, yellow and green radial LED's are spaced evenly; facing inward into the edge of the lens. The light from the LED's warps around the magnets as it passes through the fluid. This is the basic version video with one magnet from youtube user, SirZerp, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lD6C6f2nu0U .   For more information that you ever wanted to know about Sirzerp's work, you can download and view the pictures and movies at http://www.sendspace.com/folder/on9dhg

The Dynamic Etalon, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byxCYvDjFRM , was conceived and developed as an economical tool for magnetic research.  Basically, this unique lens is a Fabry-Perot Interferometer combined with a modified Hele-Shaw cell. The nano particle mixture within the lens respond dynamically in the presence of a magnetic field.  Additional information on the Dynamic Etalon method, http://www.nanomagnetics.us/dynamic%20etalon.htm


GB

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi wings and gravityblock,

Those are great links.  I've actually stored the most of them for reference. But what we're looking at is how the 'lines of force' resolve themselves under conditions of 'induction'.  I wonder if this results in some kind of quantum resolution where the 'charge' distribution of the field needs to be perfectly distributed.  It is my opinion that this is the required or preferred state of the 'field'.  It's the closest it can come to equilibrium or to a 'rest state'.  And hence those symmetries?  They're blow away - just so perfect.

But I'm still inclined to suspect that the field itself can be entirely divorced from its material source.  In which case that would certainly explain the Faraday paradox.  It just begs some rather awkward questions related to the material properties of a magnetic field.  I think that classicists should revisit these questions.  LOL. 

Regards,
Rosemary

[nul-points]

hi all

i'd like to throw an idea into the magnetic 'melting pot'...

over the years there's been a lot of discussion about the possibility of the existence of magnetic monopoles

this seems to be to be a 'non argument'

it appears to me that what we call the 'poles' of a magnet are in fact either the convergence, or divergence, of the magnetic spin field (what we call the magnetic field lines)

we see the similarity between, say, a bar magnet and an energised solenoidal inductor and say that they both exhibit two poles (under steady-state conditions), one at each end of the structure

we say that a compass brought near either magnet or steady-state inductor (aka electro-magnet) will point either towards or away from the 'poles' of the structure

however, we also know if we unwind the inductor (whilst still energised) then the magnetic field lines now all circle the wire with the same spin direction - either clockwise or anticlockwise viewing the wire end-on, dependent on the current direction through the wire


we've removed the condition which supposedly provided two magnetic 'poles' - does this mean that our compass no longer 'knows' where to point?

No - because a compass doesn't point towards or away from a 'pole' - it aligns with the spin direction of the magnetic field

now the compass will align with the tangent of the magnetic field lines circulating the energised wire

reverse the current and the compass turns and points the opposite way, following a reversed circle around the wire

so, the nearest we get to a physical, macro, 'magnetic monopole' is a single, straight, energised conductor


what we do, when we start to coil an energised conductor is to cause all the magnetic field lines to enter (like a torus) at one side of the coil and they will all exit (like a torus) at the other side of the coil

our compass isn't 'pointing at a pole' - instead it's just aligning with the field direction - at one end all the circulating field lines are directed into the coil/ magnet structure - at the other end all the field lines are directed away from the structure

we can't place our compass inside a physical magnet, but if we placed it inside our inductor, would it still point to the 'North pole'?  No, it would point to the other end now, because it just continues to align with the spin/ field direction


does the magnetic behaviour of a solenoidal coil tell us anything about the solid physical magnet?

well, the nearest atomic equivalent to current flow through a conductor would be the orbital movement of the mobile charge carriers (ie. electrons)

an electron orbit would be like a single coil of our energised inductor, so we could expect that our atom would exhibit a torus of magnetic field lines, all entering at one 'side'. perpendicular to the electron orbit - and all exiting at the opposide 'side'

by aligning the spin direction of the mobile charge carrier orbits, we 're effectively packing a huge number of single-turn inductors next to each other (in three dimensions) so that their magnetic field lines all flow through the solid object as if it were one 'solenoidal' inductor

there are still no 'poles' within, or at the ends of, the physical magnet - just convergence and divergence of magnetic field lines

let me just say that i'm not suggesting this negates Rosemary's thesis - i feel it just helps us to get a better understanding of magnetic behaviour than our old idea which led us down a dead-end street with the concept of magnetic 'poles'

apologies, this post has become a 'bit of a book' - i'll go back to sleep now!


all the best
sandy

[XS-NRG]

Not only the single, straight, energised conductor 

I have several bars at home that act like monopoles.
When north is at the left and i turn it 180 degree north is still at the left.
This is because it is influenced by the earths magnetic field.
The field lines of the earths magnetic field are dominant in this material, and that decides which end is north, so no mater how or where you point the bar it always has the same pole configuration.