Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

[TinselKoala]

I am sorry that i dont conform to your science.
I have drawn the shape of the effective magnetic fields-the definitive fields.Your unified field theory is just more junk science that leads people up the garden path,and confuses the hell out of them.

Wrong. The standard interpretation of field lines is used by engineers every day to design things that actually work. Not junk science at all, but real science, supported by all kinds of math, experiment, experience and actual working stuff like motors, generators, CRTs, electron microscopes, CAT scanners and more.

Your fancy terms mean nothing to me,as i am after physical realities. You(nor anyone else) cant even tell us what is suppose to be flowing from north to south-depicted on the pretty drawings by arrow's.

Wrong again. The physical realities are shown by the working devices that were designed according to the conventional view of field lines. The arrows indicate the direction a test particle of a particular type would tend to move at that particular location, as I've mentioned before. Nothing "flows" along those lines of flux unless you put something there.

[These are man made confab's-nothing more. This direction of flow as shown by the arrows on the magnetic field drawings dose not exist,nor do field lines.

Almost right. The concept of "field" and the "field lines" that represent the field are indeed man-made constructs... not confabulations, but useful aids to understanding, just like contour lines on a topo map or isobars on a weather map. Look on a mountain, you do not see "real" elevation contours, but the topo map tells you how fast and in what direction a beachball would "flow" on the real terrain. Look in the sky and you do not see isobars, but the isobars on the weather map tell you how fast and in what direction the wind will be blowing. Very useful constructs, just like the field lines and arrows of a magnetic field depiction.

North and south is mans way of depicting a difference/an opposite,and these opposites merge at the center of the dipole,one dose NOT contine to dominate from one end of a magnet to the other.

Nope, wrong again. All magnetic field lines are _closed loops_, there is no such thing as a real magnetic monopole, and this is the actual physical meaning of the Maxwell's Equation called Gauss's Law of Magnetism: DivB=0. "North" and "South" correspond to the arrows on the closed loop of the field line, or the direction a test particle would move at that location. Consider the circular magnetic field around a single current-carrying wire: North means you are looking at the arrow point face-on, South means the arrow point is hitting you in the back of the head. So to speak. Same thing is true for the _closed loops_ that are made by the field lines of a permanent magnet: they are all closed loops, arrow pointing out of the "N" pole, looping around and entering the "S" pole _and continuing unbroken through the physical body of the magnet_. Closed loops. DivB=0. That is just the way it is! And we are surrounded by devices that prove this _fact_ every day.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/maxeq.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/maxeq2.html#c2

The effective fields ARE in the shape of a figure 8/peanut. All closed systems have a minimum of two loop's-not one.

For certain values of "effective" only. Your "two loops" are not mapping field lines, they are mapping resultant forces, which are combinations of the forces a ferromagnetic particle would feel as it is attracted to _both poles_ of the magnet, and as it tries to move in the direction and with the strength that is the _resultant_ of the vector sum of the felt forces from both poles. This is not the same thing as the field lines which describe the field, and are mapped by the Hall sensors and which are used in designs of magnetic systems that actually work as the designers intend.

[TinselKoala]

Thank you Itsu,TK and AC for doing these test. Different results from TK to that of Itsu and AC,so where dose that leave us?

Not actually, I think all three of us have shown similar results, if you allow for possible saturation of my sensor near the poles. AC's interpretation is different, but his data also seems to be perfectly in accord with the standard view, as is Itsu's and mine.

[tinman]

Below is a simple picture useing pipes,water and a pump to show what a hall sensor is showing in regards to a magnetic field as a whole.

Water is simply being circulated around an enclosed system. On pipe A we have 3 pressure gauges,and the arrows depict water flow direction through the pipes and pump. If we take a flow meter(the equivalent to what a hall sensor would be in the magnetic field mapping of a PM)and placed it anywhere in pipe A,it would read exactly the same flow rate along the length of that pipe,even though we have different pressure levels along that pipe(that would represent the figure 8 when mapped). As you can see,the first gauge reads 5psi(we will call this end south so as the arrows that depict flow line up with those as depicted in magnetic field drawings),the middle gauge reads 0psi(this is the area where the vacuum from the inlet of the pump is equal to the pressure out from the pump),this is the null magnetic field region. The last gauge(the north end) shows a negative pressure of 5psi-the opposite to the first gauge.

As you can see,the water is indeed flowing through the pipe(this is true also for magnetic flux along the length of a magnet),but you will note that the pressure value at the center of the pipe is 0,regardless of flow.The first gauge and the last gauge can perform work in that they move the needle in the pressure gauge-->the middle gauge cannot. This stands true for a magnetic field around a PM

[MarkE]

I am sorry that i dont conform to your science.

Dude, we are talking about two things:  Accepted conventions, those are necessary for effective communication, and accepted science which takes strong evidence to change.  What you are doing is saying that the latter is wrong, because you choose to misinterpret the former.

I have drawn the shape of the effective magnetic fields-the definitive fields.

You have drawn a representation of flux density after a fashion where distance from the magnet indicates magnitude.  The rest of the world draws plots of magnetic flux. 

Your unified field theory is just more junk science that leads people up the garden path,and confuses the hell out of them. Your fancy terms mean nothing to me,as i am after physical realities.

You know this: "I am ignorant, hear me roar!" routine eventually gets old. Ignorance is not superior knowledge.  It is a lack of knowledge.  Several here have extended you great patience in terms of trying to help you connect your observations to the reality of the very good understanding that we have of how magnetic fields behave.  You have returned those favors with some pretty rude behavior. 

You(nor anyone else) cant even tell us what is suppose to be flowing from north to south-depicted on the pretty drawings by arrow's.

It is called magnetic flux.

These are man made confab's-nothing more.

The representation of flux using lines is certainly a man-made convention.  As TK says:  "Don't confuse the map for what the map represents."

This direction of flow as shown by the arrows on the magnetic field drawings dose not exist,nor do field lines.

Magnetic flux is very real.

North and south is mans way of depicting a difference/an opposite,and these opposites merge at the center of the dipole,one dose NOT contine to dominate from one end of a magnet to the other.

The north and south ends of a dipole indicate the maxima of tension in a given orientation.  In a dipole you can think of them as the ends of a stretched spring.  At each anchored end, the tension measured externally is towards the opposing end of the spring.  Internally the spring tension magnitude is constant.  There is no tension zero half way or anywhere else through the spring.  But if you simply drive current through a very long straight wire you will not be able to find a north or south end.  You will only find an orientation of flux that surrounds the wire.

The effective fields ARE in the shape of a figure 8/peanut. All closed systems have a minimum of two loop's-not one.

What you are calling effective fields is more or less the local flux density.

[MarkE]

Below is a simple picture useing pipes,water and a pump to show what a hall sensor is showing in regards to a magnetic field as a whole.

Water is simply being circulated around an enclosed system. On pipe A we have 3 pressure gauges,and the arrows depict water flow direction through the pipes and pump. If we take a flow meter(the equivalent to what a hall sensor would be in the magnetic field mapping of a PM)and placed it anywhere in pipe A,it would read exactly the same flow rate along the length of that pipe,even though we have different pressure levels along that pipe(that would represent the figure 8 when mapped). As you can see,the first gauge reads 5psi(we will call this end south so as the arrows that depict flow line up with those as depicted in magnetic field drawings),the middle gauge reads 0psi(this is the area where the vacuum from the inlet of the pump is equal to the pressure out from the pump),this is the null magnetic field region. The last gauge(the north end) shows a negative pressure of 5psi-the opposite to the first gauge.

As you can see,the water is indeed flowing through the pipe(this is true also for magnetic flux along the length of a magnet),but you will note that the pressure value at the center of the pipe is 0,regardless of flow.The first gauge and the last gauge can perform work in that they move the needle in the pressure gauge-->the middle gauge cannot. This stands true for a magnetic field around a PM

You have chasen an arbitrary location for your pressure zero.  The pressure falls from the pump outlet all the way back to the pump inlet.  Were the pressure actually zero at the middle of the upper pipe segment, there would not be any impetus for water to continue to flow past that point.