Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

[MarkE]

MarkE,

I agree.

That is why I stated I was still trying to imagine a conductor that passes current without producing a magnetic field.

I am, however, still trying to ponder whether it might be possible to have an "apparent" electron flow in a given direction while producing a magnetic field opposite to conventional electron flow in that direction.

Any thoughts?

PW

If there is net charge movement, then there is a magnetic field.  Whether the charge moves by way of charged particles through a volume or charge appears to move because of charge movement on either side of a volume there is a magnetic field intrinsic to that charge movement, or so we think applying SR to: charge, time, distance, and the electric force.   

I don't know where Tinman can go by suggesting moving charge (in a wire) of any kind without a magnetic field when to the best of our knowledge a magnetic field is intrinsic to moving charge.

[MarkE]

Hi Tinman,

What follows is pure speculation, consider this as a thought experiment.  I am not interested in facts, no facts will be presented, I have no interest in finding supporting literature for the concepts I'm going to suggest.  The purpose of this post is for entertainment purposes only.  Now having said this, and expressing no interest in the facts, I am sure this will be ignored and the ideas presented challenged.  I want to make it clear that I have no desire to debate the known and established.  I am most interested in that which is known but isn't established.  This is about opening the mind to new possibilities, its about being creative, dissolving the box which imprisons our creativity.

Assuming we are a few years off from being able to purchase such a conductor from our local outlet, a little time should be invested in finding a means for producing this condition with our present understanding, using materials we are familiar with, and can acquire now.  We know that it is possible to produce the zero magnetic field, we see the concept in wire wound resistors.  We know that when we wind two conductors together and cause current to flow in them, the fields projected from these wires can neutralize when current is applied to them in the proper manner, you are well aware of this. 

It is clear that such a configuration presents us with a very different situation than the norm, and yet few realize the significance of such a configuration.  When we are guided by the basic idea which is embodied in the definition of inductance, the role of which is to oppose change in flux or current, we would begin to understand the significance.  It is my opinion, one which I will not defend, in a configuration where the fields are neutralizing, two EMF are induced, the currents associated with these two are in an ideal condition equal and opposite, the magnetic fields associated with them equal and opposite, the net effect, the mechanism for opposition to change in current is neutralized. 

This simple idea, "neutralization of the mechanism responsible for opposition to change in current",  opens every door which has up to this point been slammed in our faces.  The benefits granted to a system based on an application of the aforementioned are too numerous to mention, and it is my firm belief that all of them lead to more out than in.




Regards

Aryton Perry windings greatly reduce but do not eliminate inductance in wire wound resistors.  As long as there is physical space between the centers of two conductors they cannot completely couple their fields and so cannot create a net field that adds to zero.  A coaxial cable does a really good job of establishing two fields that outside the outer conductor the fields (in the case of rigid coax) exactly cancel.  So if one wanted to test the idea of a transformer with neutralized flux, they could go buy a bunch of thin coax and use that for the windings.

[Floor]

@ all readers

Is it a misconception that permanent magnets can do work, or is it a misconception that they can not do work ?

Photos / demonstration of the device are forth coming as soon as I get it mounted on a good solid base.  At this point I have only been setting it up on the coffee table.

Please find the attached file  Mag Ramp 1. PDF

             floor

[MarkE]

@ all readers

Is it a misconception that permanent magnets can do work, or is it a misconception that they can not do work ?

Photos / demonstration of the device are forth coming as soon as I get it mounted on a good solid base.  At this point I have only been setting it up on the coffee table.

Please find the attached file  Mag Ramp 1. PDF

             floor

Robbing Peter to pay Paul does not generate a never ending cash flow.

In the case of this second SMOT variant that you have presented in the past few weeks, the magnets do not perform any cyclical work just as they don't in any SMOT.  As with your previdously offered SMOT, your machine does not complete even one cycle.  It goes from an initial state of higher total potential energy to an ending state of lower total potential energy.  Your machine as depicted takes the steel ball from a higher to lower magnetic potential.  Along the way the gravitational potential of the ball rises and then falls.  At the end of your sequence, you are deficit both magnetic and gravitational potential energy compared to your starting state.  Like all SMOTs, external work is required to overcome that deficit and return the ball back to its original position. 

[tinman]

Tinman,

So, is this just a thought experiment or "otherwise"?

PW

Yes-your thought experiment PW