Hi all,
In the link below you can download the book by Albert Roy Davis and Walter Rawls "Magnetism and It Effects on the Living System".
http://www.mediafire.com/view/du8271s882xf9kd/Magnetism_and_Its_Effects_on_the_Living_System_by_Albert_Roy_Davis_and_Walter_Rawls.pdf (http://www.mediafire.com/view/du8271s882xf9kd/Magnetism_and_Its_Effects_on_the_Living_System_by_Albert_Roy_Davis_and_Walter_Rawls.pdf)
As you could verify their findings are in agreement with those of Howard Johnson and also Leedskalnin. Roy Davis and Rawls also state that there are two types of magnetism (one from the north pole and one from the south pole, one of them good for the health and the other bad for the health).
Also they state that the intrinsical nature of magnetism create a vortex with different direction of rotation in each pole. The magnetic flux lines convenge in the center of the magnet creating a neutral zone ( Bloch Wall )
As you can see their findings are in complete agreement with those for other non conventional magnetism researchers. Mainstream science should revise this findings.
I hope you could find useful this post.
Regards
PS. Book by Howard Johnson "The Secret World of Magnets" http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/pdf/3935.pdf (http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/pdf/3935.pdf)
The figure "Bloch Wall Illustrated in a Magnet" includes the description "Point of Zero Magnetism known as the the Bloch Wall."
Okay, so a magnet is a bar of iron that is permanently magnetized. So what happens if you cut a bar magnet in two? Does the Bloch wall of zero magnetism in the original permanently magnetized magnet all of a sudden get magnetized? Do the new smaller permanent magnets have new Bloch walls of zero magnetism that magically appear in areas that formerly were magnetized?
So does that mean every time you cut a permanent magnet in two you get one Bloch wall that magically disappears and two new Bloch walls that magically appear? All this inside permanent magnet material?
This is what it looks like inside a permanent magnet. The boring conventional explanation is true and reigns supreme.
When you slice a magnet in two not much happens. No magic magnetization and demagnetization events take place inside the permanent magnet material. Life can be so simple sometimes.
Hi MileHigh, I undestrand you because it is not easy to accept such a big change
The problem with mainstream science is that he/she does not admit any experimental test against its foundations. In the book by Howard Johnson is descrikbed the experimental method used to measure those fields.
It is simple: just a Hall detector and any magnet that you choose. Please just read quikly his book and you would find some interesting subjects for any curious mind. We don´t have to settle principles which seem graved on stone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xq9VVGYoSU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xq9VVGYoSU)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_JE7tFFaPo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_JE7tFFaPo)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR7c4iXum-A (http://www.overunity.com/www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR7c4iXum-A)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3grPo81fBrA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3grPo81fBrA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMoYEQFhQoc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMoYEQFhQoc)
I am looking for some other videos showing those effects. If anyone have some videos or links please post them to enrich this forum. Thanks for your collaboration
Regards
Hanon:
I looked all all of your clips and they prove nothing. They mostly consist of people that don't know what they are doing and don't understand what they are observing and then arriving at wrong conclusions. That's a foolish and potentially dangerous state of affairs.
I raised the issue of the magic disappearing and appearing Bloch walls when you cut a magnet into two halves and you ignored it. Chances are that just about any proponent of this false notion that a Bloch wall exists in the center of a magnet will ignore it also.
There is no evidence that a Bloch wall exists in the center of a magnet and tons of evidence that one doesn't. All that you have to do is open your mind and open your eyes and start doing some critical thinking. Don't let yourself get deluded just because you want to believe that "alternative is cool."
MileHigh
Hi Hanon,
I think this is an interesting subject. Good call. Good links.
Hi, MileHigh, :)
you can see the Bloch Wall with the green-magnet-viewing-plastic. I've tried it, and it's very clear.
I'm not sure I understand your objection to the concept. It does seem to be accepted. Perhaps you could elaborate on why you object?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_wall_(magnetism)
I'd noticed the lack of field at the center of a coil in practical experiments too - it's a consideration for my Fin-motor design, (that I * will * build soon)...
When you cut a magnet in half - it becomes two magnets - so yes, the BW does 'move' in a way. I think it's a property of the bulk material, rather than individual molecules... Magnets, like many things in this holographic universe, have some of the properties of holograms. ;)
Regards
Tim
You could look at it like this.Lets say the north field is hot water,and the south field is cold water. The two mix together,and you have warm water. The point is,although you now have a mix of the two-they are both still there-there not just gone.
I hate that word-the bloch wall-sounds so berdini.
Two of the video's you posted Hanon ,contradict one another. Do you know which two im refering to?
Tim123:
What is the green magnetic field plastic really telling you? Have you ever thought about that? What does it mean when it's dark, and what does it mean when it's light? What is going on? What does it really and truly mean? I have seen so many clips where people play with that film and nobody seems to be concerned with this.
So you point to a white line on the green film and say, "That's proof of a Bloch wall." Really? Make a clip first that explains what the green film is actually doing and how you interpret the patterns of dark and light on the film when it interacts with a magnet. Then apply that knowledge to what the green film is telling you when you think that you are looking at a "Bloch wall."
Your Wikipedia link is perfectly legitimate and it has zero relation to the imaginary Bloch walls that some people believe are inside permanent magnets.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVrwNIWlbcE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVrwNIWlbcE)
What people should try to get from the above clip is that if you have an imaginary sphere, the net magnetic flux through the sphere is always zero. Whatever flux comes in also has to go out. So if the imaginary sphere was inside a bar magnet with one half in the alleged Bloch wall area and the other half where there exists a magnetic field, then there would be a net magnetic flux through the imaginary sphere. But this is impossible, the net magnetic flux through an imaginary sphere is always zero. That means the magnetic field is consistent through the bar magnet as per the diagrams I posted. Here's where you need an open mind and some imagination to get this.
MileHigh
Take note from 2:17.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9zaPH_DaxM
Hi MH :)
I understand that the alternative explanation would be that the line shows the point where the N & S fields * cancel each other out *, as opposed to a point of genuinely no flux. Admittedly, it's hard to test, but given Howard Johnson's extensive experiments with mapping fields using stepper motors and a 3D Hall-effect sensor, I'm inclined to at least take his opinion seriously.
Surely if the Bloch wall exists in magnets at all, it has to exist in permanent magnets? I didn't think there was any qualitative difference between PMs and EMs...
I understand the difference between a monopole & a dipole that the vid explains.
1) My understanding is that the BW is a 2 dimensional plane - so you couldn't have the imaginary sphere you describe where half is 'in' the BW:
QuoteThe magnetization rotates through the plane of the domain wall
2) As magnetic lines of force are circular - it would make no difference anyway... At least I can't imagine what you're describing... (perhaps a diagram?)
I'm going to have to test the field inside a coil properly - as part of the Fin-Motor work. Is there any experiment you can think of which would actually resolve the question to your satisfaction? If so - perhaps I'll do it.
The question:What is the true topology of the North & South magnetic fields? a) Is there one field circulating N to S through the magnet - as traditionally described?
b) Are there 2 opposite fields emanating from the 2 halves of the magnet, separated by the Bloch Wall?
c) Are there 2 opposing fields N and S, both going in opposite directions to each other through the length of the magnet.
d) other suggestions?
Certainly interesting stuff...
:)
Tim
If you look at the field lines of a PM or EM,what you call the bloch wall ,is only the weakest part of the continuing field. Where the field lines are tightest or closest together,is the strongest part of the field.This is actualy inside the magnet itself. But as we cannot use that part of the field,the next inline is at each end of the magnet,where the usable field has the tightest field line pattern.
The center part of the magnet,has the widest or weakest field line arangment,so the field is weakest at that point. This is the point you refer to as the bloch wall-but there is no wall at all,or break in the field-but only the weakest part of the field.
So if you place a piece of flat steel in the center of the magnet,standing on edge,ofcourse it will feel as though there is a nutral point,as the steel will be getting pulled toward each end of the magnet with equal force.
If some one is pulling on your left arm with 10 pounds of force,and some one is pulling on your right arm with 10 pounds of force-which way are you going to go?
If there was some sort of neutral point or bloch wall,then it may look something like pic 1 below.
But as you can see in pic 2,there is only continuing field line's-no bloch wall to be seen.
This is were you would find a Bloch wall:
[N-----S] [Iron Bar][S----N]
There would be a Bloch wall in the center of the iron bar and it would have some thickness. There no such thing as a Bloch wall in free space.
QuoteWhat is the true topology of the North & South magnetic fields?
There are no separate North and South magnetic fields. That's simply a naming convention. That might be the root cause of the misunderstanding. Magnetic fields are loops with no beginning and no end and no North and no South. If you can understand that (see Tinman's clip) then that leads to understanding that there is a smooth continuous magnetic flux through a bar magnet. You can imagine it's like the bar magnet is a small rectangular wind tunnel pushing the air through in a nice linear flow. The air then circulates around the room and then goes back into the entrance of the wind tunnel. That's what magnetic fields "look" like. Do you see two different kinds of wind? The answer is you don't. What you do see is two different directions for the same wind.
Hllo Folks,
lets get some of facts straight:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_wall_%28magnetism%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_wall_%28magnetism%29)
A blochwall is a transition-line ( area) between the spontaneous magnetisation areas of a ferro-magentic material ( not magnetized ) and is not a fixed local entity. See the picture of a magnet with the sections A-B-C. The fieldlines of the elemtary magnets are spinning 180 Degrees in the center of a bar-magnet and oriented in the direction of the viewer...and this means then that the outer field is twisted....and they do not add up to zero. Blochwalls move if an external field is exerted to the material and can even disappear if all domains are alligned in a solenoid-core.
And of course if you split a magnet into two, a new zone B must be created.
In the german part of the wiki you can find a more detailed picture ( HT-HT ) which shows the effect of the moving Blochwalls if an increaisng external magnetic field is exterted
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weiss-Bezirk (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weiss-Bezirk)
The difference between a ferromagentic material ( not magentized ) and a permanent magnet are the angles of the fieldlines of the random domain-structure versus a forced two-domain-structure.
Hope this helps
Regards
Hi,
My aim with this post was to show these discoveries. I knew that some people will be open to discussion and other people just won´t accept it. Please don´t kill the messenger. I just ask you for reading the two books and LATER discuss if they make sense or nor. We can not say "no" because it has been "no" for a century and a half. Howard Johnson and, Roy Davis & Rawls worked with magnet for many decades. The wrote those two books to compile their findings over that time. The book written by Roy Davis and Rawls,Magnetism and It Effects on the Living System, was not uploaded into internet. I had read about it but it was not accesible on the net. I bought an old edition into Amazon used books and I scanned it in order you could have access to that info.
I already know of another researcher, Marcos Pinel, who built a theory stating that the center of the magnet was a point of null magnetic field. The image below was done (not by me) with a magnet in front of a CTR screen.
I just ask to study this information, not just read my initial post and in 5 minutes reply because it sounds weird. Take into consideration that those books are a serious work done over many years of researching. I am just exposing that info for people who could take profit of it.
Regards
Hi Guys, thanks for the replies. I get the Bloch wall idea now. I'm tending to agree with you, but open minded to both ideas ATM.
There's definitely more to magnetism than the standard science acknowledges - it does have a spiralling component - for example. Eddy currents are interesting things...
Tinman, I've heard argued that the traditional image of iron filings on a magnet is not a true representation because the filings act as magnets too and distort the field. It's possible...
The thing is - none of us can actually see it - and it's virtually impossible to test - unless you can find a material that's only attracted to one polarity...
Also, you have to bear in mind that we're only able to experience the 3 dimensions of space plus time, which I don't think is where the action really happens... 3D spacetime is a projection of a more fundamental reality...
Hanon, don't be too sensitive to the critics, but do listen to them. Sometimes they're right, but not always. ;)
What you see on the CRT screen is not a picture of the fields - it's a picture of what the fields do to electrons. I'm not sure it's possible to draw any conclusions either way from it.
You have to admit that it's a little wierd - in the standard model - how the magnetic lines of flux switch between one polarity and the other at the mid-point...?
I mean - it can't be that the fields 'cancel each other out' can it? There's only one field. How can a single field cancel itself out?
Quote from: tim123 on September 08, 2013, 02:09:39 PM
The thing is - none of us can actually see it - and it's virtually impossible to test - unless you can find a material that's only attracted to one polarity...
how the magnetic lines of flux switch between one polarity and the other at the mid-point...?
It is only needed to have a Hall effect sensor and to measure the field in the three axis X, Y,Z as Howard Johnson did it. He took more than 5,000 readings in each magnet to map its magnetic field in 3D. He explains the method with detail in his book and it is a straight forward procedure.
Roy Davis & Rawls state that the switching of polarity is done in the center zone (bloch wall)y as they explain in his booky where a kind of "8" shape is formed. These are their experimental results.
A video to show all those concepts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg)
Regards
Quote from: hanon on September 08, 2013, 04:51:26 PM
It is only needed to have a Hall effect sensor and to measure the field in the three axis...
Hi Hanon,
well, the method you describe is better than nothing, but it's like a blind man trying to feel the world with his fingers - not as good as sight. We only get to see the effects - and not the cause.
My feeling is that the standard model has to be wrong - because one field can't cancel * itself * out - it's illogical. The field has to either flip at the mid-point, or it's 2 fields.
I'm going to launch into some heavy theorising: ;)
The fact the the field doesn't rotate with the magnet (see faraday disk) I take as evidence that the magnetic field is caused by a higher-dimensional effect...
A permanent magnet is constantly circulating PURE CURRENT - Amps with zero volts. (The opposite of an electret) A current gives rise to a magnetic field... So current and magnetism are the same thing - just in different dimensions:
ALL mainstream physics accepts the liklihood of extra dimensions. They say these 'extra' dimensions are 'curled up', and smaller than the Plank length. I think they're right, although they've got it back to front...
WE are living in the curled-up spiral dimensions, and the extra dimensions are actually the 'linear' ones... It's just that our entire being is a spiral too - that everything looks flat to us....
Anyhow - let's just go with the version as it looks to us - i.e. like the extra dimensions are the little curled-up ones...
So a permanent magnet contains current perpetually flowing in the 4th(+) dimension(s) of the magnet material. That current is forvever spiralling inwards, in eddys smaller than the Plank length.
Thoughts anyone?
Another nonconventional researcher, Marcos Pinel, also proposed (independently) in the 70s a theory where the center point of the magnet has null field.
http://hemeroteca.abcdesevilla.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1978/05/21/053.html (http://hemeroteca.abcdesevilla.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1978/05/21/053.html)
Too many independent researcers seemed to arrive to the same conclusion. Could it just be that all they were upon something which is a real fact. There are too many coincidences ...
Regards
8
@ Hanon
I believe you posted the video below,earlier in the thread.
Most here are saying that the spin direction of the fields change at the center of the magnet(the so called bloch wall),and yet the video that you posted shows the spin to be in the same direction from bottom to top???.Then by simply turning the magnet over,we get spin in opposite direction-but the direction of spin on the north end,is the same direction of that on the south end??.
So which one is it guy's?,dose it change direction at mid point(so called bloch wall),as pictures above show, or dose it remain the same direction from noth to south,as video show's?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMoYEQFhQoc
I think the questions: 'What is a magnet, and how does it work' cut right to the very heart of physics.
As I said, I think magnets are impossible to understand without invoking extra dimensions.
I mean - what exactly is a 'field' - physicists talk about 'exchange of particles' - but that's just a bad guess in my opinion.
Current flowing in a wire creates a magnetic field because that current is actually running thru *all* spatial dimensions - not just the 3 we can see. This includes the 'curled up' '4th+' dimensions. So we get a curled-up current - which we see as a magnetic field.
Actually like I said - I think the 'extra' dimensions are the fundamental ones. This 3D world is a projection from there. Everything we see is a secondary phenomenon - we don't (usually) see the causes behind the scenes. Also we're the curled-up ones... That's why everything in this universe is a spiral...
Hanon:
Following up on Tinman's questions, you linked to a clip of water swirling around a submerged magnet when a wire makes contact with the magnet.
Can you explain what is happening in the clip? How does it relate to the alleged Bloch wall in the center of a magnet? Anybody?
For Tim123: Let's put the "extra dimension" notion off to the side for now. Our senses and standard measurement apparatus are perfectly capable of explaining the phenomenon in the clip.
MileHigh
Interesting observations Tim....I wonder whatever is to be made of them. It seems there is alot going on down at the 'bloch wall'. Ever wonder what were to happen if someone poked a hole in several 'blochs' at the same time? Will the wall come tumbling down? Who knows, you just might become the inventor of the 'Halbloch' array! Stranger things have happened.
Put two magnets together end to end, observe the apparent field. What happens when the two are slowly separated? Note the effect on geometries and strengths at various locations of the field(s). There is much to be gained from experimenting with magnets held in close attractive proximity. Study the rapid gains being made with graphene. Now imagine commensurate manipulations of magnetic materials.
Of course, we're merely playing a severely handicapped game of catch up...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnsta0cwZqQ&list=FL6chcsLXw3o_U9O6Jy5WgHg&index=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnsta0cwZqQ&list=FL6chcsLXw3o_U9O6Jy5WgHg&index=1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRBkF6YsvuM&list=FL6chcsLXw3o_U9O6Jy5WgHg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRBkF6YsvuM&list=FL6chcsLXw3o_U9O6Jy5WgHg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FryZrDKwv_o (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FryZrDKwv_o)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FryZrDKwv_o (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FryZrDKwv_o)
They're zipping around doing who knows what and we're still playing with our 'blochs'. And since we're probably all in the 'matrix, why bother putting our heads down to follow a trail of relative bread crumbs, when the real show is above and beyond us...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRu_-9MBpd4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRu_-9MBpd4)
Had to throw that last one in for a bit of cosmic relief.
Hi MileHigh,
Above your question about the spining bubbles , this don´t have any relation with the Bloch Wall. In the magnetism findings done by Howard Johnson and Roy Davis & Rawls apart from stating that a bloch wall exist in the middle of the magnet they also manifest that the nature of the magnetic field is a vortex or better said two vortexes. The magnetic vortex has one direction of rotation in one pole and the opposite in the other pole.
From the videos that I linked in my second post I don´t know more anyone because they are not done by me. I am just exposing some curious findings
Summarizing apart form the center bloch wall with null field, those researcheres also discovered that the magnetic field creates a double vortex. And also they discovered that there were two kind of magnetic energy travelling in opposite directions but with opposite spin (one form each pole) and also they found that the field strength in opposite poles is not exactly the same. Thus why I said to read those two books. There are many facts which are outside the current theory. All I know is from those books. I trust their many years of research and their thousands reading to map the magnetic field in 3D. Why don´t any conventional -but curious- scientist make the same readings? We usually take as graved in stone many things which are just based in just iron dust put over a paper sheet near a magnet. The iron dust becomes a magnet when exposed to a magnetic field. It is like trying to measure the weight of an object with a scale whose internal parts become more weighted when a object is put over it.
Regards
Hanon:
I don't know why they got those strange results when doing the probing with the Hall effect sensor. However, the Hall sensor will have it's own measurement limits. Was this discussed in the books? Also, the Hall sensor needs DC current to function and this may disturb the ambient magnetic field that you are trying to measure when it is not very strong. I never used a Hall sensor so I am just speculating. The possibility I am looking at is the Hall sensor's measurements were unreliable were the magnetic field is weakest, along the center of the outside of the magnet.
Just to talk nasty for a second, there exists the possibility that the whole Howard Johnson/Davis and Rawls business is a con.
I tried to look up a magnetic field direction sensor consisting of a tiny magnet inside a set of tiny gimbals but I couldn't find one. I bet you they exist though.
As long as the iron filings are lightly sprinkled they will not disturb the magnetic field of the magnet in any significant way.
Here is the explanation for the swirling bubbles:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fnq8TGbTfE
The "Magnet Flipper" guy made that clip and claimed the "swirling bubbles" were a new discovery or something like that when in fact he had no clue what he was looking at.
MileHigh
QuoteI tried to look up a magnetic field direction sensor consisting of a tiny magnet
inside a set of tiny gimbals but I couldn't find one. I bet you they exist
though.
Yep.
http://www.indigo.com/magnets/magnaprobes/ (http://www.indigo.com/magnets/magnaprobes/)
And they tell you about the same story as a flashlight tells you about photon packets.
QuoteThe iron dust becomes a magnet when exposed to a magnetic field. It is like
trying to measure the weight of an object with a scale whose internal parts
become more weighted when a object is put over it.
Hanon, well put.
Our current understanding of this reality is rather like an infant's view of the world from inside it's mother's womb. Man has spent so much time, so much effort, for such tentative steps toward greater understanding.....When so many 'shortcuts' have been designed all around, within and without us.
TS
Why is it that as long as the iron filings are lightly sprinkled they will not disturb the magnetic field of the magnet in any significant way?
QuoteWhy is it that as long as the iron filings are lightly sprinkled they will not
disturb the magnetic field of the magnet in any significant way?
Depends on one's subjective understanding of the relevance of the term, significant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMLPJqeW78Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMLPJqeW78Q)
So, when and if one is able to peer into the smallest of the small, perhaps we discover how irrelevant our observations of what 'big' and 'small' really are.
Your question is tantamount to asking, "Why is it that when small gravitic dipoles, such as satellites and micro-meteoroids are lightly sprinkled in earth orbit, they will not disturb earth's gravity field in any significant way?"
TS
TS:
Thanks for the link to the gimbal sensors. Very cool, I think every experimenter should have one. You could check out your field from your big Tesla coil if it was sensitive enough. Of course you could always push extra current through your coil to make the measurement. Also, very useful to check the coupling between magnets and generator coils.
The ones you linked to looked kind of cheap through, not lab grade. I bet you there are old lab grade ones from the 1960s that are beautiful.
Not significant would be that the field lines, if they are disturbed, would be displaced by less than 0.5% of their normal distance from the center of the magnet.
QuoteWhy is it that when small gravitic dipoles, such as satellites and micro-meteoroids are lightly sprinkled in earth orbit, they will not disturb earth's gravity field in any significant way.
It is a good analogy. Can someone answer the question though....
MileHigh
New probe measures magnetic field inside solids
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/apr/08/new-probe-measures-magnetic-fields-inside-solids (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/apr/08/new-probe-measures-magnetic-fields-inside-solids)
MH - What's the opposite & equal of North and South?
Here's the thing about the iron fileings.
In order for them to carry a magnetic field,there has to be one there in the first place.
Another thing to concider is this-if at the (so called)bloch wall,the field is null,then when we place say two 2 inch x 1/2 inch rod magnets together N to S,why dosnt one just drop off, if at the center of the two is a null field?-as the two magnets have just become one long one.
Infact,it is extreemly hard to sepperate those two magnets,and that can only mean there is a very strong field at the center of the magnet-not a null field.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 09, 2013, 03:11:50 PM
For Tim123: Let's put the "extra dimension" notion off to the side for now. Our senses and standard measurement apparatus are perfectly capable of explaining the phenomenon in the clip.
Hi MH :)
I dont think this is true. As far as I'm aware, physics can only describe the effects - it has nothing to say about the causes.
The vid you posted - they have the 'Left & Right-Hand Rules' - describing the motion. But no real idea as to * why * that occurs, only speculation. Current physics is * totally incapable * of explaining magnetism in general... At least it was the last time I checked... ;)
Magnetism * is * a mystery - as is all of physics if we're honest - that still remains to be revealed. People only * think * they know things...
If we ignore the extra-dimensional stuff when dealing with reality - then all we'll end up with is an approximation.
Regards
Tim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jxzYTDX8bIg#t=18 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jxzYTDX8bIg#t=18)
Quote from: tinman on September 09, 2013, 08:59:46 PM
Another thing to concider is this-if at the (so called)bloch wall,the field is null,then when we place say two 2 inch x 1/2 inch rod magnets together N to S,why dosnt one just drop off, if at the center of the two is a null field?-as the two magnets have just become one long one.
Infact,it is extreemly hard to sepperate those two magnets,and that can only mean there is a very strong field at the center of the magnet-not a null field.
Lol. Can't fault the logic.
I think the Bloch wall - from what MH was saying - is a special case where two * opposing * fields meet in a non-premagnetised ferromagnetic material. He described it very clearly.
The 'null' field at the center of a magnet must be a different phenomonon. It's not a Bloch Wall. It should have it's own name.
But it's not really null - there is still field there - as TM pointed out the 2 magnets will hold together. If you cut a magnet in half in that orientation they'll stick together.
Something happens in the middle of a magnet - and it looks like the field 'flips' polarity. But if you had 2 separate fields it would look functionally the same to us - given our measuring equipment...
Perhaps the magnetic field - current spiralling in the 4th+ dimension - appears as an 'N' to us in one half of the cycle, and 'S' the other.
I once placed a wind up watch near the center of a magnetic field to see it's effect on time. As I slowly approached the field, I noticed time slowing.....then the watch stopped! Time apparently stands still in a magnetic field! It seems to have had a permanent effect on the passage of time in the immediate vicinity of the watch as well, because other watches that come in contact with it, have slowed to a stop as well. I will buy more watches and keep you all apprised of my discoveries.....That is, provided I do not get sucked into the future and smash into a bloch wall at relativistic speeds.
TS
Quote from: TechStuf on September 10, 2013, 04:37:59 AM
I once placed a wind up watch near the center of a magnetic field to see it's effect on time. As I slowly approached the field, I noticed time slowing.....then the watch stopped! Time apparently stands still in a magnetic field! It seems to have had a permanent effect on the passage of time in the immediate vicinity of the watch as well, because other watches that come in contact with it, have slowed to a stop as well. I will buy more watches and keep you all apprised of my discoveries.....That is, provided I do not get sucked into the future and smash into a bloch wall at relativistic speeds.
TS
Lol-nice one Tech,place a magnet near a time keeping mechanical oscillator,and wonder why it slows or stops lol.
Maybe try placing a magnet near a sun dial,and see if the shadow slows or stop's?.
Quote from: tim123 on September 10, 2013, 04:23:44 AM
Lol. Can't fault the logic.
Perhaps the magnetic field - current spiralling in the 4th+ dimension - appears as an 'N' to us in one half of the cycle, and 'S' the other.
One has to wonder about that magnetic current you talk of Tim.
A direct current can produce a magnetic field,so why cant a direct magnetic field produce a current?.
Oh wait-it can-the N machine.
QuoteMaybe try placing a magnet near a sun dial,and see if the shadow slows or
stop's?.
LOL.....I actually fogged up a sun dial with bose-einstein condensate once and it took a little while for the shadow to appear. (I kid. It wasn't bose einstein condensate but it did fog up the sun dial until the magnifying glass in my back pocket ignited the cloud and my future flashed behind my back.)
The theory is developing...
I have always felt that the 3D space we're in is *not* the 'real' universe. I've always felt that distance, and space was an illusion.
Modern physics treats this 3D space a a fundamental part of the universe - and they assume it's rules are universal laws.
My feeling, as I've said, is that all we see is *effects* and never the *causes*, and if fact this entire 3D universe is an effect caused by something in the dimensions we can't see.
I think that distance and separation are effects caused by the creation of dipoles in the *real* dimensions.
So I hypothesise that:
- the electrostatic field is like the 'primary dipole', it is 'voltage' or 'potential' and it is the first spatial dimension.
- the magnetic field occurs when current flows between the two potentials. It is the second dimension of space.
- the gravitic field is the 3rd dimension, and it's caused by ... the change in angular momentum of the current, I dunno yet - something like that...
But all these 3 things are just aspects of the same thing - the 'universal dipole'...
So the 3 *apparent* dimensions we see are secondary effects caused by the fractured way we see the universe.
The question is: How many *primary* dimensions are there? I.e. the ones we *can't* see. I'm working on the hypothesis that there are two, maybe three...
Yeah, I know it's heavy. Not exactly sure why I'm suddenly thinking about this stuff - but hey, why not... :D
Quote from: tinman on September 10, 2013, 05:04:21 AM
One has to wonder about that magnetic current you talk of Tim.
It seems absolutely clear to me that a permanent magnet has current flowing though it - permanently - with zero volts.
Just like an electret has a constant electrostatic field - with zero current.
The question then becomes - how the heck can it do that?
The answer is - by having more dimensions than we can see - and in those dimensions the material behaves like a superconductor does in ours.... :)
...and those dimensions appear as spirals / vortextes to us - which is why the experimenters Hanon mentioned found vortexes of field lines.
@Tim
You cant have current without voltage,even if that voltage is low,it is still there.
Current is carried by electron's in electron flow. For there to be a flow of electrons,there must be a potential difference (voltage).
You can have voltage without current,but you cant have current without voltage.
Tim123:
Why not just look up how a magnet works instead of speculating about extra dimensions? You are illustrating the classic problem with the forums, and that is to speculate about things without having mastered the fundamentals. That clip with the magnet in the water and the swirling bubbles is another good example. That guy talks about an "amazing discovery" but he clearly doesn't have the slightest clue that moving charges will be deflected by a magnetic field and that explains the infamous vortex.
Tinman:
You can have current without voltage. The classic example is a superconducting ring - an inductor. Yes, people will be dismissive of that because it's too esoteric. But like I had a debate once with Farmhand where people get all upset when you talk about ideal inductors but are just fine with treating their capacitors like ideal capacitors. You can have a voltage source without any current flow and you can have a current source without any potential difference.
It might be that a current source with no apparent voltage difference is something that you won't see often in real life. It doesn't matter, you see approximations to it in real life. Perhaps more importantly, current sources are used in electronic circuit design all the time and your typical bench power supply with 10-turn knobs for the voltage adjustment and the current adjustment can be configured as a current source just as easily as it can be configured as a voltage source.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 10, 2013, 09:02:08 AM
Tim123:
Why not just look up how a magnet works instead of speculating about extra dimensions? You are illustrating the classic problem with the forums, and that is to speculate about things without having mastered the fundamentals.
Hi MH :)
If you can point me to a source of information which explains: *how a magnet works * - as opposed to: * what it's behaviour is * - without using self-referencing terms like 'magnetic domain' or 'magnetic moment' - I would be most grateful, and will read it immediately.
Regards
Tim
@MH
I would dearly like to see a real life device that show's a current flow with 0 volt's. Even a super conductor is not absolute 0 in resistance. So where there is a current flow across resistance(no matter how low) there will be a potential difference.
How can you ever have current without P/in?. I meand 10,000 amp's at 0 volts=0 watts-ohms law.
Quote from: tinman on September 10, 2013, 11:13:53 AM
I would dearly like to see a real life device that show's a current flow with 0 volt's.
That would be a permanent magnet then. ;)
From what I read superconductors absolutely do have zero resistance - that's the whole point. But, they usually also have a counterpart current which does follow ohms law. So the conductor is simultaneously operating in 2 different modes... It is pretty wierd.
To get current into a SC - you have to do it when it's not in the SC state, then cool it until it switches - then - I think you still have to supply the conventional current part - although it's very small... Perhaps someone who knows more will comment.
It's not such a stretch of the imagination is it?
- Pure voltage = Electrostatic Field
- Pure current = Magnetic Field
What about this weird magnetic effect discovered by Wesley Gary ?
WESLEY GARY NEUTRAL ZONE
The neutral zone is a neutral line where the polarity of an induced magnet ceases and beyond it changes polarity
I have seen some videos and it seems to refer to two repelling magnets which get attracted to each other when they are put closer and closer. The original effect seems to be done and tested in horseshoe magnets. As far as I have seen with bar magnet shapes it seems to need sticking a iron bar to one of the magnets.
http://www.rexresearch.com/gary/gary1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/gary/gary1.htm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYvP7VuFmNo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYvP7VuFmNo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6QQ9i6siGM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6QQ9i6siGM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GKDM3n1Wek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GKDM3n1Wek)
I've tested Wesley Gary's principle with a coil hooked up to an oscilloscope.
If there's a point where the field flips polarity - it should give a spike of voltage thru the coil. Wesley Gary designed a generator based on the principle.
I couldn't find a point where the field flipped, but it's an easy experiment for anyone with a 'scope (they're cheap), and it's quite possible the failure was mine...
Tim123:
QuoteIf you can point me to a source of information which explains: *how a magnet works * - as opposed to: * what it's behaviour is * - without using self-referencing terms like 'magnetic domain' or 'magnetic moment' - I would be most grateful, and will read it immediately.
Perhaps your question can be posed another way: Why does a moving charge produce a magnetic field? These clips might not answer why, but at least they answer how:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waTF7kjmmt8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xrUPxWfVvk
Anyway my advice is that before you ask the "big questions" learn the answers to the small ones. I think it was you that stated that sprinkling iron filings is no good because it will disturb the magnetic field of the magnet. In fact that is not true and I am not going to get into splitting hairs. My guess is that you "made a pronouncement" without the necessary knowledge to truly know if what you were saying is true or not. That can be dangerous sometimes.
As a disclaimer I am not in any way trying to implore you to learn about electromagnetics. The simple advice is to try to be conservative. I don't see it stated much any more on the forums, but the line "this is research that is outside the realm of electrical engineering" is normally a laughable joke. It can be frustrating sometimes to read it but who really cares. "Cold electricity" and "radiant energy" are classic examples of the downright foolishness. What's sometimes frustrating to me is that con artists use these terms to get money off of people.
MileHigh
Tinman:
QuoteI would dearly like to see a real life device that show's a current flow with 0 volt's. Even a super conductor is not absolute 0 in resistance. So where there is a current flow across resistance(no matter how low) there will be a potential difference.
How can you ever have current without P/in?. I meand 10,000 amp's at 0 volts=0 watts-ohms law.
In real life wires have resistance, even superconductors are not absolute superconductors with absolute zero resistance. It does take energy to get current to flow. But after the current is flowing then it takes no more energy to keep it flowing if you assume an idealized zero resistance. The point is to be conscious of that. It's just like anybody that wants to be serious about learning about electronics has to understand how ideal capacitors and ideal inductors work. The "peanut gallery" comments like "that's not real life" are from people that are completely missing the point. To me it sounds like they want to avoid learning the "hard stuff" but to each his or her own.
For capacitors, the no-load condition is an open circuit with infinite resistance, and that's very easy to do in real life. For inductors, the no-load condition is a short circuit with zero resistance and that's very hard to do in real life. It doesn't matter though, if you are working on a conceptual level, which is a very useful tool. I posted how if you placed a closed Gaussian surface inside a magnet where one surface is where the alleged Bloch wall is supposed to be it would prove that the Bloch wall business inside the center of a magnet is simply not true.
Generic mini rant at the world: Magnetic fields have properties and the ridiculous Howard Johnson/Ed Leedskalnin theories simply do not correspond to the observable properties of magnetic fields. The "mysterious magnetic keeper" business that revolves around the Leedskalnin mystique is another one. There are simple explanations for the magnetic keeper and "mainstream" tech people don't even notice things like this. It's all a tempest in a teapot and it's used to take advantage of people.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 10, 2013, 05:22:44 PM
Perhaps your question can be posed another way: Why does a moving charge produce a magnetic field? These clips might not answer why, but at least they answer how:
Hi MH :)
so you failed to find such an article - because none exists. Well, thanks for trying anyway, but perhaps you're being a little obtuse. You seem to be missing the point.
All physics can do is describe the * behaviour * of magnetism. It has nothing to say about it's underlying causes.
Here's our conversation so far:
Tim: 'How does a car work'?
MH: 'You get in the door, turn the key, and drive off'.
Tim: 'No, I want to know how it works - not how it's used'
MH: 'It's irrelevant - and you don't need to know that'.
Tim: 'I think it has an engine, and I think the pedals are somehow connected in a way we can't see.'
MH: 'Look - noobs like you should just go and read the Higway Code - it tells you everything you need to know'
Sigh...
Quote from: hanon on September 10, 2013, 12:22:31 PM
What about this weird magnetic effect discovered by Wesley Gary ?
WESLEY GARY NEUTRAL ZONE
The neutral zone is a neutral line where the polarity of an induced magnet ceases and beyond it changes polarity
A battery changes polarity from one end to the other,and there is no neutral zone inbetween,so what makes you think that is the case with a magnet?.
It's like i said-how do two magnets stick together if the point of contact is neutral?
It's not neutral,infact it is extreemly powerfull.
We dont understand magnetism or gravity,but yet we lay claim that we understand electricity.
When the 3 are related,how can we understand one,and not the other two?
My guess is,we will one day find out that electricity isnt what we thought it was-well not quite anyway.We spend a lot of time looking at a 3 dimentional AC sinewave on a 2 dimentional screen.What dose an AC wave realy look like?-i lean toward a helix-the motion of the earth,sun,solar system,and universe.Any motion can be seen as a helix,depending on frame of reference.
Quote from: tinman on September 11, 2013, 03:36:16 AM
My guess is,we will one day find out that electricity isnt what we thought it was...
What dose an AC wave realy look like?-i lean toward a helix-the motion of the earth,sun,solar system,and universe.Any motion can be seen as a helix,depending on frame of reference.
Deep stuff mate. I definitely agree about the helix form of EM waves. In fact - it's (almost) mainstream science:
"all electromagnetic radiation consists of helical wave photons; electric currents consist of helical wave electrons. "http://www.heliwave.com/gaasenbeek/spap1.html
:)
Quote from: tinman on September 11, 2013, 03:36:16 AM
We dont understand magnetism or gravity,but yet we lay claim that we understand electricity.
When the 3 are related,how can we understand one,and not the other two?
My guess is,we will one day find out that electricity isnt what we thought it was-well not quite anyway.We spend a lot of time looking at a 3 dimentional AC sinewave on a 2 dimentional screen.What dose an AC wave realy look like?-i lean toward a helix-the motion of the earth,sun,solar system,and universe.Any motion can be seen as a helix,depending on frame of reference.
"The day when we shall know exactly what "electricity" is, will chronicle an event probably greater, more important than any other recorded in the history of the human race. The time will come when the comfort, the very existence, perhaps, of man will depend upon that wonderful agent." (NIKOLA TESLA)
I have just joined this discussion group, so will have to get used to your protocols!
Several times I have seen the Bloch Wall illustration, on various sites. If this works correctly, the picture should appear (copy and paste).
* bloch-wall.jpg (100.17 kB, 490x383 - viewed 377 times.)
Now to be honest, this picture bothers me. Let us imagine that we take a small piece of wood, just for convenience, and actually draw upon the surface the supposed directions of the spirals, and very importantly we must note that the ends are labelled N and S. The north end will have the counter clockwise spirals, and the south end will have the clockwise spirals, all as per the drawing. What we now do is turn this little piece of wood around by 180 degrees, so that now the south end is facing us. Do you see that the lines of the spiral on this near end are now running *counter clockwise* - but wait - just seconds ago that gave us a north pole!
To put it rather bluntly, this concept as shown in the picture is broken. Any "spiral" must run down the whole length of the bar magnet, twisting in the same direction throughout (no reversal half way along). So how then do we get a south pole at the other end? The magnetic field is a dipole by nature, the opposite ends will always be opposite poles.
This is not to presume that there cannot be some strange phenomena associated with magnets, indeed I sincerely hope that there are such, but the picture shown is in my opinion broken. Or if we may be a little more controversial, if there actually is a Bloch Wall halfway along a bar magnet, then some process other than the conventional spiral/rotation of electrons is at work.