Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[gravityblock]

Tinman,

I am speculating that you will find that the torque that spins your neo in the liquid homopolar motor video is also present in the bubble vortex video.  But, in the bubble vortex video, because the neo is stationary, the torque instead imparts a spin to the electrolyte, producing the observed vortex (A colored marker taped to a dowel and slowly dipped into your tank to approach the neo should allow you to see any spin imparted to the electrolyte).

Also, because the electromagnet has limited current flow through the electrolyte perpendicular to its magnetic axis, little torque is generated with which to stir the electrolyte, hence no vortex.

If this is correct, taping the sides of the neo should reduce the current flow perpendicular to the neo's magnetic axis, reducing or eliminating the torque/electrolyte spin and vortex.

Thanks for taking the time,

PW

This is also what I think.

Gravock

[TheoriaApophasis]

What i need is a big 2 or 3 inch neo to do these test with-that would look awsome. But as per usual,i cant get one that size here in OZ-all out of stock apparently lol.

How about a 6 inch by 2 inch  NEO?          Every soooooooooo slightly dangerous 

[TheoriaApophasis]

  But, in the bubble vortex video, because the neo is stationary, the torque instead imparts a spin to the electrolyte, producing the observed vortex (A colored marker taped to a dowel and slowly dipped into your tank to approach the neo should allow you to see any spin imparted to the electrolyte).

Too that would never explain no charge used in nanoparticle suspensions

OR.....
powdered bismuth

nano-film ferrofluid (SEE PIC BELOW)

nor pyrolytic graphite

nor.............

nor..................(my best invention in the past 6 months that I will reveal in the 3rd edition, hopefully, depending on patent seeking potential)

If this is correct, taping the sides of the neo should reduce the current flow perpendicular to the neo's magnetic axis, reducing or eliminating the torque/electrolyte spin and vortex.
PW

Nope, You LIKE MOST PEOPLE keep forgetting (dont know really) that each "SIDE" of every magnet (neo or not) has a CENTRIFUGAL and a CENTRIPETAL vortex (convergent) which = CHARGE VECTOR



You also forget or dont know that magnets (so-called, since they're NOT dominantly magnetic, not ONE BIT, rather dielectric) are CREATED by discharging capacitor banks THRU THE "POLES"

[MileHigh]

PW:

I haven't looked at the new clip but I am really feeling what you are saying, it sounds perfect.  When only the tips of the magnet can conduct current into the water, you can visualize the current "blooming" out of each end of the magnet and the "blooming" will be in a very similar direction to the magnetic field.  Hence the magnitude of the cross-product between the current flow and the magnetic field is very low and hence you don't get much of a torque imparted at all on the electrolyte "spaghetti strands."  You are awesome!

Brad, I have to scold you.  For starters, I made a posting that stated that three conditions had to be met for the vortex in the water to get created.  Look at my three conditions and relate that to what PW says and what I say in the above paragraph.  The reason to "scold" you is that you did the experiment and your conclusion was that an electromagnet produces a "different" magnetic field than a magnet.  Yet over the past few years you have looked at countless diagrams of magnets and electromagnets where you see essentially an identical magnetic field pattern produced by both things.  You probably have taken a compass and moved it around a magnet and an electromagnet and observed the same magnetic field pattern.  So how could you even say what you were saying?  It's almost like a couple of years ago when you were a beginner taking your first baby steps and every second or third clip you made you might say that you were demonstrating "something new that that science and engineering does not understand."  Respect.

I stated in an earlier posting that with your experiment you only made an observation and you did not arrive at a conclusion.  Likewise, I think one of Theoria's pitches is that a magnet and an electromagnet are very much different, the "magnetic fields are different because the sources are different" (or something like that) and that is not true.  Both an electromagnet and a magnet make use of exactly the same fundamental mechanism to generate the magnetic field.

In a similar vein, your underwater spinner is being pitched by Theoria and something new, like it's a big deal.  The truth is, you can literally construct that experiment in your head.  You know two things ahead of time, (1) the water will normally spin in a vortex if the magnet is stationary because of the cross product between the magnetic field and the spaghetti tubes of current, and (2) the water is 'sticky' and it is 'stuck' on the surface of the magnet such that the vortex will work on pushing the water and it will also push on the body of the magnet.  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  You can crunch those two things in your head before you even do the experiment and conclude that the underwater spinner will indeed spin.  The underwater spinner experiment breaks no new ground at all.

Anyway, you learned something new, and that's the most important part.  But you have to be conservative and stop arriving at conclusions that go against what is already known and well understood.  Your coil vs. electromagnet experiment was simply a "casse tete" and nothing more than that.

MileHigh

[picowatt]

Too that would never explain no charge used in nanoparticle suspensions

OR.....
powdered bismuth

nano-film ferrofluid (SEE PIC BELOW)

nor pyrolytic graphite

nor.............

nor..................(my best invention in the past 6 months that I will reveal in the 3rd edition, hopefully, depending on patent seeking potential)



Nope, You LIKE MOST PEOPLE keep forgetting (dont know really) that each "SIDE" of every magnet (neo or not) has a CENTRIFUGAL and a CENTRIPETAL vortex (convergent) which = CHARGE VECTOR

One puzzle at a time.  I am only considering why the PM created a vortex and the EM did not in Tinman's video.

Are you saying tape applied to the sides of the neo will have no effect with regard to the observed vortex in Tinman's videos?

PW