Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 509686
  • *Total Topics: 15190
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 8
  • *Total: 10

Author Topic: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"  (Read 33466 times)

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
"Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« on: November 14, 2013, 08:47:19 PM »
Hi all! Here I open a new thread for theoretical discussions about the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter, as a fundamental base for the "free" clean disposal energy" quest.

One of its secondary purposed is to free the pure experimental thread from such discussions so that experimenters could focus on their stuff.

I will paste here few starting points of discussions, especially from I and Verpies as our discussions brought us to this necessary new thread.

Cheers, Khwartz.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2013, 09:03:33 PM »
Quote
from: verpies on November 11, 2013, 11:46:13 AM
No, pressure differential is potential energy, not the pressure alone.

Fish don't feel the pressure because thy don't experience any pressure differentials. If they have gas bladders or other empty cavities inside their bodies that cannot resist the external pressure, then pressure differentials are created and fish can feel them.

At least in the fish example you have water (a proven tangible thing) that is the carrier of the pressure.  In energetic devices, you don't have any such medium, unless you postulate an ephemeral and unmeasurable Aether - a concept that has been tried and failed.

Electric charge (just like water) by itself, is not energy, either - just look at the units W=½QV
Likewise, water (and analogous media) is not energy unless you can decompose it to cause a pressure differential.

For example, you could make water electrolysis on the bottom of an ocean.  The bubbles of oxygen and hydrogen would rise to the surface performing useful mechanical work. Finally you could burn the hydrogen and oxygen at the surface in a flame or fuel cell and recover even more energy.
Maybe you could even get more energy that way than you had put into the electrolysis at the ocean's floor ;)
Not sure dear Verpies that the eather concept has failed, there are coherent complete theories in physics equivalent to the old eather concept, and as I have alreday noticed, Dirac himself, when speaking of his plenum were speaking a full energy "vaccum" but where the different energies (instabilities of potential differences) are all balanced, so why we call it ZERO Point Energy. And personaly, to conceive waves in an suppose "nothing suport" is just a big nosense, but it is just an opinion ;)

Cheers.

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2013, 09:06:53 PM »
Quote
from: verpies on November 12, 2013, 01:41:58 AM
But here we go again: Are there any takers that are willing to define Aether and its properties to me without falling in conflict with empirical observations?
See Dirac plenum theory and others I will try to find back, but for me, still EM waves without any substract (what ever we call it: "ZEP", eather, "plenum", etc.), makes much more sense than "waves of nothing" ("vacuum")

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2013, 09:06:53 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2013, 09:14:56 PM »
Quote
from: verpies on November 12, 2013, 02:04:54 AM
IMO the old Aether concept as a fluid that fills space has failed.
I came to the SAME conclusion too! Nevertheless...

Quote
Yes, there are but they are not equivalent to 19th century Aether concept.
Indeed! BUT they keep the idea that EM waves could be propagations of changes of energetical potential with specific caracteristics which make RF or light and so on.

Quote
We need to be careful with the word "Aether" because there is not a universally agreed-on set of Aether's properties.
Very agree with you!

Quote
It's much better to explicitly define its properties and verify them with the empirical reality, rather than argue about the word itself.
That what Maurice Allais have done by checking the Miller's experiment and the checking of the Lorentz's symetry: all what said "Einstein's theories" explain looks been explained with the concept of a substrat of infinitesimal step to step changes of energetic potentials. In this page you will find (but you probably know :) ) a extention of the Standard Model doing so, explaining indirectly the Allais's anomalus gravitational effect when eclips occur that contradict Lorentz symetry and so Einstein's vacuum emptyness theory.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-Model_Extension

But of course, the point of view I defend is in an opposition with near only corpuscular point of view for the light. If light is seen as a pack of waves ("waves" => parterns of changes in the susbrat), it makes more sens having of course this substrat. If only corpuscular, so we reasonning with particles through an empty space, that I well understand. But about me, I just bent on the pure waves of changes of potentials (exitations) in a substract. Then, PARTICLES are CONCENTRATED REPETITIVE CLOSED PARTERNS OF CHANGES IN A LOCAL AERA AROUND AN AVERAGE POINT, THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE SAID PARTICULE. Then MATTER is only an CONCATENATION OF PARTICLES WHERE FLOWS OF "ENERGY" (UNCLOSED PARTERNS OF CHANGES GOING TO A POINT OF THE SUBSTRAT TO AN OTHER) GLUE THE WHOLE THING.

Quote
Dirac is a famous guy but he does not have the respect of my mind.
May I know why?


Quote
As a counterpoise I will quote Mathis:That's sound thinking, but you are assuming that waves in vacuum/space or Aether are needed to explain light, photons, or RF EM.
No! I know other models can and are used with much effectiveness! But it doesn't mean that we can not do better with the "substantial" viewpoint I have chosen to follow.


Quote
You appear to be still stuck in the infantile paradigm that we are like fish stuck in a 3D aquarium (space) and clocked by an ever advancing 1D river of time.
The ONLY infantile is The One who treat others of infantile and can not accept others to have others point of view! I am very sad to see you could have gone so low! :(

Quote
If I thought that, light propagating through an empty space (nothingness) would also be a preposterous idea to me.
I can understand and accept this idea, especially if you see photons as pure particles, but interferometers show since long they are not pure solid particuless but have waves aspects in their inner structure; so the question is: "Waves of what?", "Changes of what?" in the space if the space has nothing inside?

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2013, 09:21:14 PM »
Quote
I know I should respect another viewpoint, but it is very hard for me when I see the underlying conceptual error in plain sight.  It is like seeing some child struggle with that 9-dot puzzle that needs to be connected with 4 lines and seeing the error he makes over and over, knowing that he will never solve that puzzle that way.  It would be very hard to be respectful towards such error and treat it as "another point of view".  My dilemma is similar.

I do understand you despite I could feel exactly the same about you! ...

Quote
Well deserved.  I apologize if I offended you with the phrase "infantile paradigm". Perhaps I should have used the words like: simplistic, routine, common, fashionable, trendy, ubiquitous, etc...  I meant no malice - it's just that I had this discussion so many times that I am getting exasperated with repetition.  You're just an unlucky guy that came as last to that discussion...
If you say so ;)


Quote
Please distinguish a discussion about a different point of view from a discussion about a conceptual error that is well known to one party.
I do understand what you mean; except that from my point of view I make no conceptual error and you rather do.


Quote
I've been there, done that 23 years ago when I was that proverbial pup trying to solve that 9-dot puzzle.
I don't see them as particles nor waves and I don't see them as traveling through space nor Aether but I understand how they can appear to do so.
OK, so how do you see that please?

Quote
There is no answer to this, because in this question you falsely assume waves.
Falsely for your concern, as I understant now, ... but not for mine.

Quote
There are no such changes in space as you are asking for.
Prove it! Or demonstrate it, please; if you can!!

Quote
This question indicates to me, that you did not take my comment to heart and you are still stuck in that bleeping 3D/1D paradigm (s3/t1).
Space as you know it is just an emergent 3D geometric reference system created by motion of gravitating observers through projective geometry.
As a reference system space cannot be curved or distorted or have waves in it.  Yes, Einstein would turn in his grave if he could read that...
We do not need Einstein's complications of screwing the space, fields theories can do much simpler for the same results.

Quote
Do you really want to discuss such stuff on OU forum?
Most people here will not understand it anyway and soon start objecting to too much abstraction and too little engineering....and they probably would be correct.
Well, if made on a specific thread, who cares?! If at least 2 people are interested ;) and could one or a other day someone else be interested. "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter", is that a name you would approuve or have you a better name, dear Verpies ;)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2013, 09:21:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2013, 09:25:18 PM »
Quote
So let's define these conceptual errors so we have something concrete to discuss:

I claim that space (and time) of our daily lives are just geometric reference systems and their only properties are magnitude and direction.

You on the other hand, seem to claim (and correct me if I'm wrong) that space is a 3D container that envelops us all and is endowed with myriad of properties, such as permittivity and permeability and is filled with something called Aether that acts as a fluid or gas and has the following properties (list them) needed to support propagation of light between atoms as waves.  You do not address the properties of time at all, other than its one-dimensional nature.
Most likely you think that time represents one dimension of some 4D continuum, while space represents three dimensions of the same continuum.

I realize that I'm putting a lot of words in your proverbial mouth but this is to provoke you to revise the paragraph above according to your framework of understanding the physical universe.
Much groundwork would need to be covered first.
Read this with a rigorous understanding and follow the links in it (even if it takes you a week), but remember that this is not my framework.
While I agree with most of Mathis' conclusions, my framework is much more fundamental because it addresses the composition of charge, photons as well as the nature of space and time (Mathis' framework does not).

I'm starting with somebody's else's framework because you have mentioned Dirac's concepts and they need to be addressed first (Mathis addresses legacy concepts much better than I) before we jump into the more fundamental framework of mine.
As a teaser of what's coming when we get to it - I will ask you a simple question:
What is "motion" and what are the units of it?

P.S.
Let's create another thread for such discussions before we upset people here with this off-topic stuff.

Hi dear Verpies!

Very thanks for your answer and the very rigourous and constructive approach looks to me you take.

I will open soon the new thread where I will probably paste our former posts here on the subject so that the discussion could be understood from its beginning, and let you know. I will take too the necessary time to study the material you gave me. And yes, I do understand your way to put in my mouth words so I could react and so specifying my point of view.

Thanks for the opportunity you give me to discuss this very fundamental subject.

Cheers, Khwartz.

PS: did you have look on my suggested schematic-test for possible EM pumping effect?

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3858
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2013, 09:32:20 PM »
I agree with Tesla : space is abstract used to measure nature. It has no own properties. All is defined by metric. About time I'm not sure. Aether surely exists and it's properties are responsible for all forces in nature.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2013, 09:32:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TechStuf

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1280
    • Biblical Record Proves True
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #7 on: November 14, 2013, 09:33:33 PM »

Perhaps it's time to reconsider the phrase that started it all.  "Let There Be Light"....and there was light.  "Light" or EM waves encompass all that we know.  Of course it includes the visible spectrum, but goes much further than we know.  Upon consideration of the experiments of John Hutchison and many others, one begins to see that matter itself is truly a form of condensed energy. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOi5RMM7wVc

The magnetic beam amplifier of Lockheed Martin also exhibited similar results.  The miracles mentioned in the Bible, become easier to understand in light of the demonstrable fact that subtle energies are often used to control what we consider more potent forms.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - A.C. Clarke

And with advanced technologies come advanced directives and commensurately advanced responsibilities.  Those now exercising such powers on our planet are sorely behooved to consider Who came before, what was foretold, and what is promised to come AFTER.....

ALL is belief.  And what is accomplished through belief based upon accurate knowledge is incomparable.

Strong Faith, based upon accurate knowledge IS a form of "subtle" energy that directs much greater perceived energies.  Man only glimpses these truths as he is currently unfit to gaze at length upon them. 

"For the wisdom of this world is nonsense to God, for it is written: “He has seized the wise in their craftiness.”


Blessings


TS


Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3389
On the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2013, 10:14:01 PM »
Here I have a schematic. :)
What happens with the electric field of the capacitor in- and outside of the Faraday cage?
I do not like discussing things that are not defined.
The electric field is a spatial field of various hypothetical forces that would move a test electric charge, if it was there.  Formally, it is a derivative of the electrostatic potential.
When the test charge actually is located in that electrostatic field, these forces are transmitted to it by bombardment ( no, not by Aether - read this if you care by what ).

A test charge is compelled to move from a high electric potential to a low electric potential.  In other words it reacts to difference in potentials, just like dust is compelled to move from a point of high air pressure to a point of low air pressure, by uneven bombardment of air molecules (air pressure differential = wind).

When Faraday's cage is closed, its inner surface becomes equipotential because it is conductive and matter affects the direction of the charge bombardment, mainly because of its nuclear structure (that's why different elements affect the charge interactions differently).

Equipotential means that the same electrostatic potential is everywhere on its inner surface (but it is not zero!).
When potentials are the same, a test charge inside the Faraday's cage has no reason to move (zero electrostatic potential differential).  That creates an illusion that no forces act on it, and for the mental construct such as the "electric field", "no forces" means "no electric field".  However the charge bombardment still occurs all around - it is just equal in all directions thus it has no preferred direction (there is a word to describe this situation - it is "pseudoscalar"). 
Fish also don't feel the pressure of water because the pressure acts on them from all directions equally (in that analogy water pressure is equivalent to the electrostatic potential)

When you open the cage, the bombardment of the charge stops being pseudoscalar (uniform in all available directions).  It becomes unequal in some direction and that means that unequal electrostatic potential is created on one side of the test charge in the cage.  Now the charge is compelled to move away from the direction of higher potential (away from more intensive bombardment).

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

On the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2013, 10:14:01 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Zeitmaschine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1267
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #9 on: November 14, 2013, 11:45:44 PM »
And now what does that all mean in reference to the Faraday cage on Kapanadze's table? Each time I point out that there is a Faraday cage (an old Sadolin pot) in plain view right in front of the camera on Kapanadze's table that subject gets quickly buried under tons of unrelated stuff. What could this tell us?

Could this »spatial field of various hypothetical forces« have something to do with the high output current of that paint can? Does Miles Mathis know the principle of work of the Kapanadze device? Maybe he should study the Kapanadze equations as soon as they are out. :)

So I have a cage and this cage is bombarded (by something). Then how to convert this bombardment into an electric current? It should be so simple you'll ...

Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3389
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2013, 12:25:49 AM »
That is different because in that case we have a time a time varying magnetic field that does work by pushing the charges away.
In your pot/cage system, the work was supposed to be done by the attraction of separated opposite charges coming together.
But we do have a time varying component: it is the closing and opening (electronically) of the Faraday cage that creates incoming waves of an otherwise static electric field.
But you are missing the point. 
The issue here is not that some field is time varying but the difference in the type of force that drives the charges. 
In the case of electrostatic induction it is the force created by another charge that causes the separation of opposite charges in the cage material. 
An energy recuperation in this case can be only upon relaxation of those separated charges as the try to attract back together.

In case of the coil the force driving the charges is different and it acts differently. Most importantly it causes the usable motion of the charges immediately - without intermediate energy storage in the separation of opposite charges.

Can we convert a static magnetic field into a varying magnetic field without the consumption of (much) energy? I don't think so, but maybe, who knows.
Can we convert a static electric field into a varying electric field without the consumption of (much) energy? Since contrary to a static magnetic field a static electric field can be shielded easily, therefore I think it is more likely that this could work.
Yes, canceling the forces acting on electric charges is possible in case of electrostatic phenomena.
We cannot easily shield that 'something" that causes those forces, but we can redirect it and symmetrize it out ...with matter.

P.S.: Since we don't know what an electric field actually is, then maybe it doesn't matter that we also don't know what a magnetic field actually is, does it?
We do and it matters.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2013, 12:25:49 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3389
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2013, 02:01:52 AM »
And now what does that all mean in reference to the Faraday cage on Kapanadze's table?
Not every closed metal box must purposefully function as a Faraday's cage, even if it inadvertently functions as such.
Maybe its function is sociotechnic or anti-EMI or even a container for a transformer oil.
But for the purpose of your proposition we may assume that it purposely functions as a Faraday's cage.

Could this »spatial field of various hypothetical forces« have something to do with the high output current of that paint can?
It's your baby.  We can discuss it and see where it takes us.

Does Miles Mathis know the principle of work of the Kapanadze device?
He does not even know who he is.

So I have a cage and this cage is bombarded (by something).
Yes, by "something" that is 108 smaller than electron and has mass (and all the consequences that go with it), but is not that mysterious vacuum Aether.
We will not discuss the composition of that "something" for now, in order not to get sidetracked.

Anyway, the directionality of that "something" is affected by matter.  The nuclei of different elements affect it differently.  These nuclei can divert it, redirect it, spread it around or generally directionalize it differently, but they can never slow it down nor stop it nor absorb it.  I don't think that matter can reflect it 180º and with 100% effectiveness, either.

As a side note, I should mention at this point that this opportunist Joseph Newman, somehow got it it right that this "something" moves not only linearly but also spins as it travels.  This rotational motion can be clockwise or counterclockwise relative to the direction of its linear movement and that spin is the cause of magnetism.

Then how to convert this bombardment into an electric current?
I don't know - it's your baby.  I can only tell you if it has arms and legs.

You can certainly "turn-of" the force acting on a charge inside a Faraday's cage.
Perhaps you could trap a carrier of electric charge  (ion, electron, positron, muon, etc...) in a circular orbit in that cage and periodically "turn-off" the force from a charge outside the cage that acts on the trapped charge inside the cage, during that portion of the orbit when that force would slow down orbital speed of the trapped charge.  This would accumulate kinetic energy in the motion of charge carrier (e.g. ion).

The catch is whether the opening and closing of your cage "doors" would be energy efficient, e.g. because the charge trapped inside the cage attracts the "doors" of the cage.

You have to propose some mechanism of closing and opening the door periodically without expending much energy.

Offline Zeitmaschine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1267
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2013, 03:15:29 AM »
That baby has arms and legs, so what do we have besides arms and legs? A metal box that looks like a Faraday cage with something attached that looks like purposeful shielding. Further properties are: this cage has an outside and an inside, the outside is grounded, it is hollow, there is high voltage in that cage and there are holes in it for some wires. Here comes the first question: Is that function that we are looking for (the tapping of an electric field) created by means of that high voltage or is the high voltage created by that function?

Anyway this reminds me somehow of the two Kapanadze heat sinks. So I would rather tend to the former.

Another question would be, do we really need high voltage or could it do grid voltage as well? Maybe the latter works also but it generates less output energy.

The normal way to use (or demonstrate) a Faraday cage is to have high voltage outside and a shielded space inside the cage. But obviously in this case the situation is vice versa. The high voltage is clearly inside the grounded cage. If I'm correct then this high voltage should create an electric field inside that grounded cage. Hence could this field inside work as a periodical door opener for the field outside by means of the outgoing wires which acts as antennas?

Maybe someone could make a quick experiment so we can amend that results to the textbooks. :)

But you are missing the point. 
The issue here is not that some field is time varying but the difference in the type of force that drives the charges. 
In the case of electrostatic induction it is the force created by another charge that causes the separation of opposite charges in the cage material. 
An energy recuperation in this case can be only upon relaxation of those separated charges as the try to attract back together.
I think we both missing the point somehow. What is the difference between the electric field of a charged capacitor (electronic part) and the electric field of a charged capacitor (Earth-Sun constellation)? If the electronic capacitor contains usable energy (a connected lamp shines) then the Earth-Sun capacitor should contain also usable energy, shouldn't it? So that should not be the problem.

Thus I will rephrase my question: What exactly (what physical law) prevents us from connecting a load to that Earth-Sun capacitor (tapping the static electric field of that capacitor)? Except of course that we can't reach the Sun's surface. Why can I get energy out of an ordinary electronic capacitor although its electric field is also static without any time varying factor (oscillations)? That what we need is an artificial second capacitor plate as replacement for the plate that is represented by the surface of the Sun, isn't it?

P.S.: Given what I can see (or not can see) on Kapanadze's table that whole equation stuff looks rather overcomplicated to me. :(

Offline d3x0r

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1364
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2013, 05:27:53 AM »
(ADDED)


thought for food....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWkhUwX4D5s

Hmm but they stop at....  a magnetic field changes the direction of a moving charged particle.... how does that explain feromagnetism ... attraction of magnets... which is sort of a gravity... I guess magnetic poles attract.

is a single electron moving a current?


Does the current have to go through the structure of a conductor? (end of video 1 in russian has electrons spiraling around an orbit as they move, which would be a hint towards skin effect).


If two wires with current in the same direction attract each other, because of opposing direction of poles at their mating... why isn't this just a cancelation instead of a composite to build a larger field?

So... to move an electric charge, you would need to have a magnetic field always at a right angle to it vs its direction... that itself moves...


dollard mentions that magnetism results from electrons stopping not moving.  A CRT has electrons moving, but they (are?) magnetic.  If they are moving faster do they have a smaller field?  Or because they have mass they get deflected less?  or deflection happens based on charge only and not mass?


is the magnetic field always everywhere?  Or only where we detect it to be?  would it happen to be somewhere else if we weren't obstructing it? 





(russian, but the animations make some sense)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VELYp3FZnHY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-8ZijiWAOE

Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3389
Re: "Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2013, 10:29:14 AM »
Hmm but they stop at....  a magnetic field changes the direction of a moving charged particle.... how does that explain feromagnetism ... attraction of magnets... which is sort of a gravity... I guess magnetic poles attract.
Yes, attraction of magnets has a lot to do with gravity (which is just a pseudoscalar 3D motion in all available dimensions).
Anyway, take a look at the illustration below depicting the head-on collision of spinning baseballs, to get a rough* mechanical idea why magnetic phenomena is perpendicular to electric phenomena and read this for a detailed explanation.  Take your time reading it - if you just skim it without understanding, then it will be lost on you and you will annoy me with confused questions later.

is a single electron moving a current?
Yes

Does the current have to go through the structure of a conductor?
No

If two wires with current in the same direction attract each other, because of opposing direction of poles at their mating... why isn't this just a cancellation instead of a composite to build a larger field?
Because of spin superposition. Read the article.

So... to move an electric charge, you would need to have a magnetic field always at a right angle to it vs its direction... that itself moves...
Yes, that's why a rotating magnetic field acts like a fan for stationary electric charges.
Take a look at the photo of such magnetic fan that was used to pump out electrically charged dust from a clean-room.
Open this animation in your browser to see how 4 coils fed by phase-shifted current can create a rotating magnetic field (2 crossed coils can do the same).

dollard mentions that magnetism results from electrons stopping not moving. 
Well yes, but not electrons.  It is the smaller "entities" driving electrons that get stopped, just like the linear-motion of those counter-rotating baseballs gets stopped (in the direction of their original linear motion).

A CRT has electrons moving, but they (are?) magnetic. 
Not by themselves, but together with motion they will interact magnetically with other entites.

is the magnetic field always everywhere?    Or only where we detect it to be? 
A magnetic field is just an abstract mathematical construct, a name for a region where electric charges would experience forces perpendicular to their relative motion. 
In other words it is a force field (a field of forces that would act on moving charges). 
A field of hypothetical forces is not something real. 
However those little spinning entities (motions or spinning units of space), that cause the magnetic interactions, are real and they are almost everywhere.

If they (electrons) are moving faster do they have a smaller field?
A field is just an abstract mathematical construct that illustrates interaction between motions, in the form of forces that would occur between two entities (motions).  One entity cannot have a field of forces by itself.  It takes two to tango. It takes two entities (motions) for an interaction to occur.

Because of the above, I have to answer "no" electron does not have any fields by itself, but the faster it moves the more it interacts magnetically with other entities, and when these interactions occur, then forces are created.  Those forces can then be predicted and abstracted into a force field ... even if they don't actually all occur.

Or because they have mass they get deflected less?  or deflection happens based on charge only and not mass?
Both. That's the Modus Operandi of mass spectrometry.

would it happen to be somewhere else if we weren't obstructing it? 
I don't understand that question.

(russian, but the animations make some sense)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VELYp3FZnHY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-8ZijiWAOE
I can't stand to watch them despite understanding Russian.
Electrons orbiting the nuclei disgust me too much.



* "rough" because rotational axes are drawn incorrectly.

 

OneLink