TA,

Having read your replies made while I was posting, are you continuing to draw a distinction between a magnet made using a PM and a magnet made using an EM (or cap discharge into an EM, which is the same thing as any other EM)?

PW

are you continuing to draw a distinction between a magnet made using a PM and a magnet made using an EM

Here is your error,   which I get your brain block.


resultant  SAME GAUSS RATINGS

resultant  WHOLLY DIFF CAPACITANCE, and permanence.



I can take an N42 Gauss ferrite and reverse its polarity in 1 SECOND   



try doing that shit with a NEO or somarium cobalt    ROFL

They are NOT,   you fail to grasp that a soft ferrite "MAGNET" has ONLY dielectric coherency, and NOT an increase in dielectric capacitance.

But you have stated previously that some electrical means, i.e., cap discharge, is required to make one type of magnet and a that a PM can only be used to make another.  Assuming you are making a distinction between a SmCo or NdFeB magnet and say AlNiCo and FeO ceramics, according to someone who designs the equipment that is used to "magnetize" them, the process used to "magnetize" them makes no difference.  As long as the magnetic field (oersteds) applied to the poles of the pre-magnet are similar, and of sufficient strength to overcome pinning forces, the source of the magnetic field or the rate at which it is applied is unimportant (as long as the rate is slow enough to prevent inducing unwanted levels of eddy currents).

Heres an analogy for you.


5 watts of INCOHERENT LIGHT

5 watts of COHERENT LIGHT

100 watts of COHERENT LIGHT



Get it yet? NO?  YES?        Holy shit.

No, I don't get it.  Your analogy makes no sense.

PW

electrets are such high resistance they do not generate continuous magnetic fields so must be applied and removed from a circuit... much like a magnet must be applied and removed from a circuit to get useful dielectric work from them.

Your praise dollard so; and yet he represents the full picture of maxwell as being both dielectric and magnetic... if one were the other you wouldn't need phi and psi... you would just need psi and a function of psi to get plank.
A capacitor is a dielectric device and has little magnetic effects.
An inductor is a magnetic device and has little dielectric effects.

A capacitor is a dielectric device and has little magnetic effects...........no shit, an UNDISCHARGED  charge is going to have low to NILL DISCHARGE (magnetism)


An inductor is POWERED by dielectricity, so thats BS.




Your praise dollard so; and yet he represents the full picture of maxwell as being both dielectric and magnetic.<<<


Longitudinal dielectrics without an (apparent) magnetic component you mean.


Six Fundamental Types of Waves: First set: TEM (transverse electro magnetic) Waves: 1. TE – Transverse Electric (Dielectric) 2. TM – Transverse Magnetic 3. TEM – Transverse dielectro-electromagnetic with dielectric as the longitudinal coaxial Z-axis.
Second set: Longitudinal waves: 1. LD - Longitudinal Dielectric 2. LM - Longitudinal Magneto 3. LMD - Longitudinal magneto Dielectric.

Electricity is comprised of two components
1. Dielectricity – Generated by a capacitor, counter-space phenomena; storage and return of dielectric energy.
2. Magnetism –Generated by a coil of wire, decaying electricity, spatial phenomena; storage and return of magnetic energy; electro-motor force; lines per second.
Electromagnetic induction – time & magnetism; produces melting; radiation. Dielectric Induction – Brighter light, no melting, higher frequency, less power usage, blue spark, growth and generation.

Electrical Engineering has four primary dimensions
Metric
1) time, t, second
2) space, l, centimeter
Field
3) magnetism, , Weber
4) dielectricity, , Coulomb

Dielectric field = Phi/LxT  (Weber per centimeter-second)
Magnetic field = Psi/LxT (Coulombs per centimeter-second)
Electromagnetic induction: E (volts) = Phi/time 
Magneto-dielectric induction: I (Amps) = Psi/time

I also believe the great minds of the past, including those you both praise and disrespect, would be amazed at where we currently are technologically and how we have used and improved upon their discoveries since their time.

This is where your brain REALLY TAKES A FLUSH down the crapper


A: they would be amazed at the TECH we have


B: THEY WOULD DIE WITH HORROR TO LEARN that we only learned how to INTELLIGENTLY manipulate shit into TECH, without understanding what is going on.




USING shit to create complex shit, is intelligence


KNOWING what the hell is going on at the fundamental level is a WHOLE OTHER THING.


Its STILL CALLED "Electrical THEORY" for a good godddamn fucking reason     



Illiterate CHINESE WOMEN build Iphones in China,  they have NO IDEA how they work.



Whats more the people that DESIGNED said device ALSO (like yourself) have NO FUCKING CLUE the difference between  Electricity and Dielectricity


nor the "difference" between saying  "negative charge" (BS)  and   "discharge" 

Re spinning magnet on a convex surface...
if the inner magnet was on a more concave surface, then the rotation would be reversed (compared to previous demos, cw motion of drive magnet will cause cw rotation).
if the curve was exactly the same then it would slide, other than when the driving magnet becomes skewed from the center... then if it's more towards the center, then the rotation will be reversed (drive cw, rotation cw), if it's towards the outside, the rotation will be as has been demonstrated on a convex lens so far (drive cw, rotation ccw)


IF the experiment was done on 2 plates of glass there would be no rotation... so there must be something about the interaction of the curve that allows it...
-----

Magnet that looks for the center of the way (video) 

The curve allows a breaking effect of the inner magnet due to how much/less conductive material is over the outer magnet, causing a rotation of the inner magnet.  There is no rotation on 2 plates of glass because the inner magnet will stay centered with the outer magnet and there will be an equal amount of conductive material over the outer magnet (see the first snapshot below and how there is an equal amount of conductive material over the outer magnet, so there is no breaking effect).  Reading the video description may also be helpful.  Notice how the inner magnet rotates around the center point of the outer magnet when they are on the curve (see the second snapshot below and how there is more conductive material on one side of the outer magnet than the other, which causes a breaking effect and a rotation).

Gravock

Magnet that looks for the center of the way (video) 

The curve allows a breaking effect of the inner magnet due to how much/less conductive material is over the outer magnet, causing a rotation of the inner magnet.  There is no rotation on 2 plates of glass because the inner magnet will stay centered with the outer magnet and there will be an equal amount of conductive material over the outer magnet (see the first snapshot below and how there is an equal amount of conductive material over the outer magnet, so there is no breaking effect).  Reading the video description may also be helpful.  Notice how the inner magnet rotates around the center point of the outer magnet when they are on the curve (see the second snapshot below and how there is more conductive material on one side of the outer magnet than the other, which causes a breaking effect and a rotation).

Gravock

Thats a cool video, I never thought of that experiment.   Its always the obvious experiments that are simple that are great. 

TA,

Why all the disrespect?  I have shown you way more respect than you have shown me (certainly more than you deserve in kind)

Is this your bragged about method of debate?  Just throw a lot of disrespect, condescension, foul language and offensive imagery at your opponent? I am not impressed...   

And just a heads up so you know that you are just wasting time typing, I always stop reading and scroll onward as soon as I see bold type, foul language and condescension in your posts.  There is no need for it.

PW

I see your diversionary tactic to keep addressing the rebuttals to your insane premises.

Wont work.



I only have to REFUTE YOU........not ----

1. impress you

2. convince you