Here is Bruce's last comment:
Quote
I could not care less about a video that has NOTHING to do with what I asked. Nor will I allow the thread to be distracted.
Nothing wrong with the discussion but none of it will help you with my question.
So...I am locking my thread to give you all a chance to get back on track. This train has left the track a couple of pages ago...lol
In a day or so, I will unlock it with.a new question.
You all may open a new thread to discuss your concerns with any youtube video you choose! Have fun
Cheers,
Bruce
Okay, so I will pick it up in the next posting.
MileHigh
So here is the clip for reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naaeDJLcxgs&list=WL1B63456BED3C1ACA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naaeDJLcxgs&list=WL1B63456BED3C1ACA)
A few of you were fairly close but because this is very basic stuff, so I was looking for a full and complete answer.
The problem with the clip entitled "Rotary Magnetic Fields" is that it is not even showing any magnetic fields.
It's almost shocking to me that nobody stated this. In the TPU thread you talk about magnetic fields ad nauseum and yet nobody noticed this? Whenever you hear "magnetic fields" you are supposed to think about field lines that form closed loops. There are no closed loop field lines in the clip therefore the simulation is not showing you magnetic fields! If you learn the basics about electricity and magnetism this is supposed to be hard-coded into your thought processes.
The clip is showing electric field lines of force. This also should be blatantly obvious if you understand the basics.
The clip is showing two rotating pairs, each pair consisting of a positively charged disk and a negatively charged disk. You are seeing the pattern of the electric field lines change as the two pairs of charged disks rotate. I say "charged disks" but they could be something else. This is all about moving objects charged with static electricity and the resultant changing electric field lines.
The clip does not state what the physical configuration is at all. What is clear is that you are "looking down" and seeing a planar "horizontal" slice of the electric field pattern. They could be thin charged disks or they could be long statically charged wires that are isolated and you are looking at a "horizontal" slice of the electric field pattern.
My recommendation if you want to get more informed is this guy: http://www.youtube.com/user/lasseviren1/videos (http://www.youtube.com/user/lasseviren1/videos)
MileHigh
Addendum: I should also state that this can be modeled by objects charged with static electricity or alternatively modeled by conductive objects (like long metal cylinders) that are connected to a DC potential source, like a battery or a power suppy. It's important to state that if the long cylinders are connected to a DC potential source that no current is flowing. So even though the long metal cylinders are connected to a DC potential source, with no current flow the rotating setup is electrically "static" also.
Just a little follow-up on Bruce's comment:
QuoteIn a day or so, I will unlock it with.a new question.
So far Bruce your questions have been so general and without specifics that they border on the ridiculous.
Two rotating magnetic fields? Where? What produces them? What is their orientation? Do they turn at the same speed? And on and on and on.
Bruce, my suggestion to you is to change your strategy. Either ask reasonable questions that are comprehensible and make sense, or just make your case with the facts as you see them.
MileHigh
See here -
http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg368941/#msg368941 (http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg368941/#msg368941)
To understand Bruce's "two fields".
Penno
@MH: they all look like closed loops to me. Usually when I think of Electric field "lines" I tend to think of equipotential surfaces, which of course are parallel to the charged surfaces not perpendicular. But if you plot "attraction" or "repulsion" electric field lines they look just about like magnetic field lines. Both are of course mathematical fictions, there really isn't any such thing as a "field line", electric or magnetic, just as there is no such thing as an "isobar" line in real weather, just on weather maps.
Penno64:
Sorry, your link is not helping me at all.
TK:
They are not closed loops, they are leaving one disk and landing on another disk. They are the path that a massless electrical charge would take in the electric field. The electric field lines are at right angles to any virtual equipotential surface that exists in empty space between the disks.
Although it's not too clear because it's a crappy 240p video, the dead giveaway is that the lines leave/land on the disks at right angles to the surfaces of the disks.
QuoteBut if you plot "attraction" or "repulsion" electric field lines they look just about like magnetic field lines.
I am going to assume the following:
Two standard bar magnets facing each other in repulsion: [S****N] [N****S]
Two rectangular metal bars facing each other both positively charged: [+++++] [+++++]
If you only look at the localized volume between the ends of the bars in close proximity, the lines of force will look somewhat similar. The giveaway will be that the electric lines of force must exit the surfaces of the metal bars at right angles vs. that not being a requirement for the magnetic lines of force.
When you look at the rest of the volume they are completely dissimilar. Plus you still can't forget the basics. Both magnets create field lines that are closed loops right out to the limit of infinity. Both charged metal bars create field lines that extend straight out to the limit of infinity and there are no closed loops.
These two clips are not a perfect match for this discussion but they are close:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I0EQzP8nBs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I0EQzP8nBs)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxTS1T6f13I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxTS1T6f13I)
MileHigh
Just something to perhaps help beginners:
Quotethere really isn't any such thing as a "field line"
There is no literal field "line." However what there literally is at any point in 3D space is a vector for either an electric field or a magnetic field. A vector has magnitude and direction, and you can visualize it as a little arrow in 3D space that has size and direction.
Since each little arrow has direction, and you can imagine a 3D matrix of millions of arrows, each one at a different position, then the arrows will line up and form a "path." That "lined up path of arrows" is the imaginary field line. The important point being that at any position on the imaginary field line, there is a
real little electric field or magnetic field vector that is lined up with the field line.
Well i did state in my answer that the shown field line's jump from one magnet to the opposite pole of the other magnet,insted of looping around to the opposite pole of the same magnet-that has to be worth half an apple lol.
Some extra information for fun. For electric fields:
The diagram below illustrates the field lines of force associated with the electric field between charges, where (a) shows the field lines connecting a negative-positive charge pair, while (b) shows the field lines separating two positive charges. The main rules that define the behaviour and properties of these field lines are listed as follows:
- Electric field lines start on positive charges and end on negative charges.
- The density of electric field lines indicates the strength of the E field in a particular region. The field is stronger where the lines get closer together.
- Field-lines never cross and never merge.
- Field lines connect perpendicularly to the source and sink charges.
- The direction of the electric force at any point on the field line must form a tangent to the field line.
Now for magnets. Not that the magnetic fields do not have to enter or leave the magnets at a right angle to the surface of the magnet.
Final comments. Some people may be wondering at how the fancy and somewhat complex field lines are formed for both the magnetic lines of force and the electric lines of force.
In actuality the process is very simple. It just a "blind and dumb" addition of the field vectors from each source at every point in 3D space that's taking place, giving you the resultant pattern. Take the example of two positive charges that are spheres. Both will emit straight lines of electric force that extend out to infinity. So when you put two positively charged spheres next to each other "nothing happens." It's like each positively charged sphere is still emitting exactly the same electric field lines. At every point in 3D space you have a vector addition taking place, one vector from one sphere added to the second vector from the second sphere.
That's why a "Rodin coil" is a meaningless futile exercise. Every loop in the Rodin coil generates a magnetic field that blindly adds to the magnetic field generated by every other loop in the Rodin coil. Instead of in a regular coil where you have a nice orderly addition of all of the magnetic field vectors contributed by each loop, for a Rodin coil you have a mish-mash were every loop is a different shape and a different orientation. You still have the same dumb blind addition of magnetic field vectors taking place but since they are not lined up like in a regular coil, you have partial additions and partial subtractions taking place. After all that trouble winding the Rodin coil you still end up with a bloody coil that has no special properties above and beyond a regular coil. A Rodin coil is just an inefficient use of wire to make an inductor and no more than that.
MileHigh
Those field lines from the magnetic diagrams are completely wrong.
Magnetic field lines emanate from electron orbitals, ie charge in motion, and are loops through those orbitals. Where and at what angle they exit the _surface_ of a bulk magnet is really immaterial. No pun intended! There are no real "lines" and there aren't even real "poles", just polarities. They are at right angles to the generating motion of charge, as always.
If you draw a single bar magnet and make it transparent, you will see that the lines do just the same thing as the electric field lines between two opposite charges. True, all the lines exiting the bulk magnet will loop around and close, and electric field lines _from a single charge_ extend to infinity... but that isn't what is shown in the diagrams. There are two charges! Not all the EF lines will extend to infinity, many or most will terminate on the charged electrodes, and the bulk diagram in the near field will look very much like the magnetic field lines within and around the bar magnet.
When you introduce a second bar magnet with its two "polarities", but compare to the field from only two electric charges as before... you no longer are making a valid comparison, imo.
Quote from: TinselKoala on August 26, 2013, 12:28:41 AM
Magnetic field lines emanate from electron orbitals, ie charge in motion, and are loops through those orbitals. Where and at what angle they exit the _surface_ of a bulk magnet is really immaterial. No pun intended! There are no real "lines" and there aren't even real "poles", just polarities. They are at right angles to the generating motion of charge, as always.
If you draw a single bar magnet and make it transparent, you will see that the lines do just the same thing as the electric field lines between two opposite charges. True, all the lines exiting the bulk magnet will loop around and close, and electric field lines _from a single charge_ extend to infinity... but that isn't what is shown in the diagrams. There are two charges! Not all the EF lines will extend to infinity, many or most will terminate on the charged electrodes, and the bulk diagram in the near field will look very much like the magnetic field lines within and around the bar magnet.
When you introduce a second bar magnet with its two "polarities", but compare to the field from only two electric charges as before... you no longer are making a valid comparison, imo.
My friend , you are one step from ou ;)
One thing that always bothers me about any graphical representation of magnetic fields is that they are shown as a two dimensional effect.
MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE 3 DIMENSIONAL.
Also there is no such thing as lines of magnetic force and even if there were, they do not follow a straight line.
Once every one clears their mind of garbage then new thinking can begin.
Magregus:
QuoteThose field lines from the magnetic diagrams are completely wrong.
In fact they are correct and you can easily observe the field lines yourself to confirm it.
MasterPlaster:
QuoteOne thing that always bothers me about any graphical representation of magnetic fields is that they are shown as a two dimensional effect.
MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE 3 DIMENSIONAL.
Also there is no such thing as lines of magnetic force and even if there were, they do not follow a straight line.
Once every one clears their mind of garbage then new thinking can begin.
Yes indeed they are three-dimensional. I am sure if you looked a little bit you could find a 3D Java or Flash applet that shows this. However, it's good to exercise your brain and make the effort to do the 3D visualization in your head.
Lines of magnetic force do really exist in the sense that you can "connect the dots" of the force vectors in 3D space using the power of your imagination to visualize what is going on. By the same token there is no North pole or South pole in a magnetic field but it is convenient to use these terms when discussing a bar magnet.
Once you get up the learning curve and master the basics then your thinking gets clearer for understanding more advanced concepts.
MileHigh
@MH
Quote
In fact they are correct and you can easily observe the field lines yourself to confirm it.
No, in fact they are not correct and are an artifact of people reading outdated textbooks from the 1920's instead of proving the matter for themselves. The picture below is a true representation of the field gradient and was taken from this website, http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v4/n5/covers/largecover.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v4/n5/covers/index.html&usg=__CC5zAf9tMp8lyQIozpVNzLkL7qI=&h=577&w=440&sz=91&hl=en&start=32&zoom=1&tbnid=koSW6CvVHf4zRM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=102&ei=HmUbUtKwBaTl4AP6rYAY&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dvisualization%2Bmagnetic%2Bfield%26start%3D20%26um%3D1%26sa%3DN%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&sa=X&ved=0CEEQrQMwCzgU (http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v4/n5/covers/largecover.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v4/n5/covers/index.html&usg=__CC5zAf9tMp8lyQIozpVNzLkL7qI=&h=577&w=440&sz=91&hl=en&start=32&zoom=1&tbnid=koSW6CvVHf4zRM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=102&ei=HmUbUtKwBaTl4AP6rYAY&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dvisualization%2Bmagnetic%2Bfield%26start%3D20%26um%3D1%26sa%3DN%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&sa=X&ved=0CEEQrQMwCzgU).
On a note of interest I knew this many years ago and mapped the magnetic field gradient with a hall effect sensor for myself after reading the research of Howard Johnson. It is also interesting to note that the field gradient as we know follows the inverse square law as such the greatest field density is in close proximity to the source polar regions. So why do the largest regions of greatest field density at the poles curl back into itself and not the opposite pole as you have suggested?. I will give you a little hint, every first year physics student knows the answer I just want to know if you do.
AC
Well the iron filings don't lie. Nice pseudo coloring where it looks like the pseudo coloring wraps around as the intensity increases. John Lennon's glasses from 1967? lol Don't know the answer.
Quote from: MileHigh on August 27, 2013, 12:53:50 AM
Well the iron filings don't lie. Nice pseudo coloring where it looks like the pseudo coloring wraps around as the intensity increases. John Lennon's glasses from 1967? lol Don't know the answer.
Facepalm! The iron filings are being attracted to the poles on the magnet, they are
NOT showing where the fields are going.
What poles? There are no true poles!
@Milehigh
QuoteWell the iron filings don't lie.
I used to think exactly the same thing and then I understood that the iron filings are effected by both the source magnetic field and each other through magnetic induction. Each individual iron filing is induced with it's own magnetic field then each iron filing parallel to one another repels and each above or below each other attracts each other. Thus it is easy to understand that the magnetized iron filings form lines not because there are lines of force but because each has become a magnet in itself. We can replace the iron filings with long slender cylinder magnets and no large external field and they form lines as well.
Think of it this way, would it be wise to measure the voltage on a conductor if all the voltmeters were not only effected by the voltage but also every other voltmeter. Well no, because all the readings would change every time we added or subtracted a voltmeter.
We cannot measure something accurately when the measuring tool (iron filing) is effected by both the external field and every other measuring tool. A hall effect probe does not have this defect and accurately measures the field at any given position.
I think it is very easy to understand and found it very surprising that so many people could be misled by by such simple effects.
AC
Quote from: allcanadian on August 27, 2013, 08:57:17 AM
@Milehigh
I used to think exactly the same thing and then I understood that the iron filings are effected by both the source magnetic field and each other through magnetic induction. Each individual iron filing is induced with it's own magnetic field then each iron filing parallel to one another repels and each above or below each other attracts each other. Thus it is easy to understand that the magnetized iron filings form lines not because there are lines of force but because each has become a magnet in itself. We can replace the iron filings with long slender cylinder magnets and no large external field and they form lines as well.
Think of it this way, would it be wise to measure the voltage on a conductor if all the voltmeters were not only effected by the voltage but also every other voltmeter. Well no, because all the readings would change every time we added or subtracted a voltmeter.
We cannot measure something accurately when the measuring tool (iron filing) is effected by both the external field and every other measuring tool. A hall effect probe does not have this defect and accurately measures the field at any given position.
I think it is very easy to understand and found it very surprising that so many people could be misled by by such simple effects.
AC
Well a steel ball between two like field's will be repelled,not attracted to the magnets,so it makes sence that the iron fileings would do the same.
But im with MH on this one-what pole's? or what do you refer to as the pole's?.
The term north pole and south pole were chosen because of the orientation of the magnetic field on earth,and ofcourse we have the north pole and the south pole.
So dose the north pole of the earth have a north magnetic field(as we are calling it)or is it a north attracting field(south field)?.Dose our compusses north needle point to a north field,or a south field?.
Well what we know as the north pole,is actualy magneticly south,and the south pole is magneticly north.
@All
Here is a picture to explain what is happening with our iron filings. In frame 1 we can see the basic forces at work, magnets on a vertical axis attract and magnets on a horizontal axis repel. Like poles repel and unlike poles attract, I say poles so everyone knows what I am talking about.
In frame 2 we see a permanent magnet which has induced a magnetic field in our gray iron filings or iron cores which is called "Magnetic Induction". Notice all the iron filings have been induced with a polarity opposite to the permanent magnet, this is because the permanent magnet is the predominant field which has induced each of the individual iron filings.
In frame 3 we see the forces pushing the filings apart on the horizontal axis which is also aligning them on the vertical axis. They are not aligning with some imaginary lines of force they are simply attracting and repelling from the other iron filings with their own induced magnetic fields. Here is an experiment, take two iron rods or bolts and align them parallel to one another on a table. Next move a permanent magnet near the rods from the top, What happens?, they move away from one another because the induced like poles at each end repel one another.
In frame 4 we see the iron filings have repelled from one another on any horizontal axis and attracted to one another on the vertical axis. On the vertical axis the like poles have moved towards one another -- Attraction. Each line of filings attracted to one another vertically also repels every other line of filings because we have like poles opposite one another like this.
Repulsion
N N
S S
Attraction
N
S
N
S
Again I must say that it is amazing that a process so fundamentally simple and taught in every high school textbook could lead to so much confusion. It is also important to understand that the fields and forces we know exist in 1" pieces of iron wire in a magnetic field do not magically cease to exist or contradict the laws of physics just because the wires get smaller such as iron filings. The laws of physics still apply it is just that they apply in a way we did not expect.
AC
The coil was froze powered up with 12v ac
?
Reference to .pdf "Practical guide to free energy" :
Dave45:
The pattern you are seeing is a Moire pattern where the magnetic field from the magnet is interacting with the TV screen's electron beam and the aperture grill and the different coloured phosphor dots on the screen. It is not showing any hex or other symmetry of the magnetic field. The different colour patches mean nothing, they are just a Moire pattern.
John.K1:
That's not what the magnetic field looks like around a bar magnet. The iron filings do not distort the magnetic field in any significant way. You can't put a bunch of magnets together in some special arrangement to get a net field in a single direction. The simple explanation and the simple diagrams that you have seen all your life are correct.
MileHigh
@MilehighQuoteThat's not what the magnetic field looks like around a bar magnet. The iron filings do not distort the magnetic field in any significant way.
You never did respond to my post concerning this issue nor critique my illustrations and explanation in post #22. Can you find any errors in my logic?, it may not be common knowledge but it has been pretty much accepted that the iron filings pattern is misleading at best. It is basically an artifact from a time long ago when when dinosaurs roamed the Earth and scientists were frolicking in pools of mercury and asbestos thinking it was perfectly safe.
Times change Milehigh and as much as you and I may think we know it all I can assure you some little brat is going to make us look stupid. We are, that is a fact of life and you can cling to the past and pretend nothing can change or grow a set of balls and take it like a man. Evolution and progress is inevitable...
Now I gave you a valid and logical explanation for the pattern of iron filings with diagrams.... prove me wrong.
AC
http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=418 (http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=418)
QuoteQ: Why do iron filings line up in a magnetic field? would copper filing be equally satisfactory? why is it desirable to tap the glass plate? why is it desirable to use very few filings? what is the method for mapping a magnetic field by the use of a small compass?
QuoteA: Iron is one of the ferromagnetic elements. Each iron filing consists of numerous magnetic domains. It turns out these domains can lower their energy by lining up with their fields along the skinny direction of the filing. Then the filing as a whole is a bar magnet, kind of like a compass needle, which can lower its energy by lining up with an external field. The effect should be enhanced by a tendency of the filings to line up end-to-end, influenced by each others' fields. If the filings are sitting on a glass plate friction can be too strong to let them rotate. Tapping reduces the friction temporarily. If you use too many filings they more or less form a uniformly magnetic sheet, losing any tendency to line up end-to-end, and also making something too thick to visualize clearly.
A compass needle is just a good example of a magnet that will line up in a field. If you had a lot of little compasses, they would be like your iron filings. If you have just one compass, you can just move it around to map out the field.
Copper is very weakly paramagnetic, which means there is a tiny effect of the same sign as in iron. I strongly doubt that you will ever notice even the slightest tendency of copper filing to line up in a magnetic field.
I would imagine your quotes relate to the "Parrot effect", a parrot just keeps repeating what they have heard until they are taught something new. As you may know People can be like that and many people still cling to the past despite the fact that science has proven them wrong. Science does not advance because it is the truth science advances only when the truth can no longer be denied by those stuck in the past.
In any case the very premise of a measure is that it remains neutral and the iron filings experiment is equivalent to a measuring tape which changes it's length every time we go to measure something.
You said your piece but the magnetic field around a magnet remains exactly in the form "I" said it is in.
If you disagree, please post a sketch showing the "new" pattern.
found this on the net, the bloch wall, figure 8
Looks like the z pinch but this is on the outside of the magnet, I think we all have alot to learn.
Does this allude to the shape or is it just an effect,
I personally think the magnetic field is an energy carrier, I think the magnetic and electric properties are two separate entity's, the magnetic field cannot be stopped but the electric field can, but then again who knows.
The figure 8 inside the neon tube is conventional. This clip gives you the explanation behind the effect (also shown in your second picture):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG2aQUD8xt0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG2aQUD8xt0)
Where do you see a Bloch wall?
Quote from: allcanadian on August 30, 2013, 11:37:04 AM
I would imagine your quotes relate to the "Parrot effect", a parrot just keeps repeating what they have heard until they are taught something new. As you may know People can be like that and many people still cling to the past despite the fact that science has proven them wrong. Science does not advance because it is the truth science advances only when the truth can no longer be denied by those stuck in the past.
In any case the very premise of a measure is that it remains neutral and the iron filings experiment is equivalent to a measuring tape which changes it's length every time we go to measure something.
So what causes the iron fileings to form that pattern in the begining,when droped randomly onto the paper ontop the magnet?.
There is one way to see a 3 dimentional field pattern being formed,and for that we can use liquid metal.
If evenly applied over the "pole" end of a magnet,we should see a smooth rounded formation-if field line's do not exist. If field lines do exist,then the liquid metal should look like some punk rockers hair doo once cured. As curing time would be hour's,then only a true result would be gained from this test.
I have the ferrofluid at home and it is actually interesting question why does it spike. Why there is no metal between spikes, or at lest at very bottom? The answer might be a viscosity or the surface potential forces in the oil (liquid)?
Hmm. How to see real magnetic field? The best would be to take a look at he Magnetar star pictures and its because if you can see the magnetic flux it is the case when the charged particles are very spread in the space and do not interact between each other as strong as iron filling. There is number of images on Google. To find which are the real and which are the photoshop I leave up to you :)
Sorry for the quality of the picture :) Interesting Gyro effect. If I have it n my hands and very slowly turn my body, the spikes tries to keep still the same orientation. Eventually it turns with delay.
Quote from: MileHigh on August 30, 2013, 10:31:27 PM
The figure 8 inside the neon tube is conventional. This clip gives you the explanation behind the effect (also shown in your second picture):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG2aQUD8xt0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG2aQUD8xt0)
Where do you see a Bloch wall?
or like this one: Understanding_Magnets_With_EFD_and_SMP (http://www.overunity.com/Understanding_Magnets_With_EFD_and_SMP)
http://www.nanomagnetics.us/ (http://www.nanomagnetics.us/)
@Tinman
QuoteSo what causes the iron fileings to form that pattern in the begining,when droped randomly onto the paper ontop the magnet?.
The process is called "Magnetic Induction" not to be confused with a similar phenomena called Electromagnetic Induction.
magnetic induction[/size][/font]
n.
1. The process by which a substance such as iron or steel, becomes magnetized by a magnetic field. The induced magnetism is produced by the force of the field radiating from the poles of a magnet.
If one single iron filing enters the field of a magnet it becomes a magnet in itself with a polarity opposite to the magnetic field which induced it ie Magnetic Induction. This is where all the confusion starts because matter cannot attract matter unless a "field" is present. It is the fields which produce the external forces not matter in itself.
Each iron filing is induced with an individual magnetic field thus the iron filings interact with the external field which induced them (the magnet) and the magnetic field induced in every other iron filing.
Let's do a thought experiment, I have 20 small magnets and I throw them on a small table one by one --- what happens?. Each magnet will be attracted to the others opposite pole and they will always form a "line" of magnets.I have done this experiment and it works every single time without fault. When the iron filings are induced with a magnetic field they always form lines in exactly the same way.
These are not field lines they are due to the magnetic forces present which cause each iron filing to be magnetized by the external field and attract each other. Remember each iron filing has an induced magnetic field of it's own. Once the iron filings form lines these individual lines repel one another giving the misleading pattern we see. Each individual iron filing attracts every other iron filing forming a line and each line repels every other line.
AC
@Tinman
It may help to completely change the context of the forces in order to see what is actually happening.
I have an empty room and outside the room we have a line up of men and women. The men and women are attracted to one another however the men are repelled by other men and the women are repelled by other women.
Now in the middle of this room we place a lunch table and both men and women are attracted to it. We open the door and a man enters moving towards the table, then a woman enters and stands next to the man in line with the table. Next another man enters and stands next to the woman. Each person entering must stand next to their opposite forming lines.
You see we must always end up with lines of people, man woman man woman man woman and these parallel lines of people must congregate around the source of attraction --- the lunch table. We see why the imaginary lines cannot cross because the attractive/repulsive forces will not allow it.We would end up with exactly the same pattern as we see around our magnet thus we could easily presume it has nothing to do with the magnet or magnetic lines but moreso a pattern produced whenever certain forces are present.
AC
Now that we understand what is in fact actually happening we can do some other more interesting thought experiments.
If we have a ball bearing 1m away from a magnet then the total work which could be performed is equal to the force times the distance moved relative to the magnet. Can you see the problem with this scenario?.
Now let's take our ball bearing and break it into one hundred pieces and stretch these pieces out so they resemble our iron filings. If we place the magnet 1m away from our iron filings then we could expect the same amount of work to be performed, force times the distance moved relative to the magnet. However we have a problem because each iron filing must "rotate" on it's center of mass to align with the external field of the magnet and this "rotation" is work. Next each iron filing moves towards the induced field of the next iron filing and this motion is also work, force times the distance moved. Finally after all this motion constituting work the iron filings then move towards the magnet as they did in our first case when the pieces were joined forming our ball bearing.
The only point I would make here is that the equal induced mass of the ball bearing and the one hundred pieces of ball bearing do not act the same. The work is not equivalent yet in the far field 1m from the magnet the force relative to the magnet should be nearly the same.
We should remember that many supposed laws or rules have an alter-ego and when they say there is nothing we can do to change the force on a body at a distance through a transformation or change in geometry this is true. If this is true then it may also be true that a the body may transform in any number of ways performing work and the force must remain the same. We have transformed the rule just as we have transformed the body and the total work performed in any given instance.
AC
hello out there,
quick question about field lines(fields)
if a saturated toroidal core (no coil) is placed inside a external field would that field be disturbed by the satuarted core and if yes how?
my sim software does not allow such configuration, just simple coils.
cheers