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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?  (Read 30645 times)

Meta

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #30 on: April 07, 2016, 07:44:27 PM »
@All

Notice that Meta writes about vortices of space ...not vortices in space.
IMO that distinction is essential to understanding how universe works.
Here he only writes about spatial positions. 
But every motion has two reciprocal aspects: space and time.  This is the reason we commonly measure speed as eg.: meters per second (m/s).
Fixating on the spatial aspect of motion without considering its temporal aspect is a huge omission.

The vortises are what space is doing...vortexing. They are not in space, doing it, they are space, doing it.

Aside....please dont point at omissions that I havent even finished describing yet...even in the esoteric bible, it takes 66 books to repeat the same story of creation, 66 times, because there is so much information to convey....so wait till the discussion is over before you open your yap.

Aditionally, to even consider time, for all you measurers......time is so fast in Universe, that its totally irrelevant to even consider it.....we may as well just say...there is no time at all....and when you reach this so called velocity, frequency or alleged speed of time, the universe stops.....what to do then hum?

Also this vague, ambiguous measure of time comes from our own scientists and they say this about time.....

Here is what all of rigorous Science uses as a definition of time: "We shall assume without examination the unidirectional, one-valued, one-dimensional character of the time continuum." Reciprocal Systems

_______________________________________________________

At the mere velocity of light, the "time" quantum would yield a "distance" quantum for a photon. If, for instance, the time quantum is 10^-54 seconds, then the distance between steps, or distance quantum, would be about 3 x 10^-45 meters at the speed of light. Woops! Your measuring instruments are already lagging far, far behind that which can't even be measured. If you blinked your eye, the Aether has renewed itself a billion times.

The beginning of the known universe is the end of the last beginning and the beginning of the next end, which only lasts for, not nano, pico, femto, atto, zepto or yoctoseconds in each state, but is so fast as to be beyond human measure. For all intents and purposes, universe has no time unit. Time units are a human invention.

 

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #31 on: April 07, 2016, 08:34:25 PM »
The vortises are what space is doing...vortexing. They are not in space, doing it, they are space, doing it.

Aside....please dont point at omissions that I havent even finished describing yet...even in the esoteric bible, it takes 66 books to repeat the same story of creation, 66 times, because there is so much information to convey....so wait till the discussion is over before you open your yap.

Aditionally, to even consider time, for all you measurers......time is so fast in Universe, that its totally irrelevant to even consider it.....we may as well just say...there is no time at all....and when you reach this so called velocity, frequency or alleged speed of time, the universe stops.....what to do then hum?

Also this vague, ambiguous measure of time comes from our own scientists and they say this about time.....

Here is what all of rigorous Science uses as a definition of time: "We shall assume without examination the unidirectional, one-valued, one-dimensional character of the time continuum." Reciprocal Systems

_______________________________________________________

At the mere velocity of light, the "time" quantum would yield a "distance" quantum for a photon. If, for instance, the time quantum is 10^-54 seconds, then the distance between steps, or distance quantum, would be about 3 x 10^-45 meters at the speed of light. Woops! Your measuring instruments are already lagging far, far behind that which can't even be measured. If you blinked your eye, the Aether has renewed itself a billion times.

The beginning of the known universe is the end of the last beginning and the beginning of the next end, which only lasts for, not nano, pico, femto, atto, zepto or yoctoseconds in each state, but is so fast as to be beyond human measure. For all intents and purposes, universe has no time unit. Time units are a human invention.

Please do not vortext and drive.
 
Thanks.
 
Bill

Eighthman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #32 on: April 07, 2016, 08:57:45 PM »
I recall that observers said that the Mark's (TPU) device had a gyro-like feel to it.  Thus, understanding how these motions work could be very important.


lumen,  I have to question why a spin motion together with a orbital motion cancel each other out yet somehow leave the magnetism by itself.  I also think this orbital/spin relation may be part of the Pauli Exclusion principle.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #33 on: April 07, 2016, 09:14:09 PM »
I recall that observers said that the Mark's (TPU) device had a gyro-like feel to it.  Thus, understanding how these motions work could be very important.


lumen,  I have to question why a spin motion together with a orbital motion cancel each other out yet somehow leave the magnetism by itself.  I also think this orbital/spin relation may be part of the Pauli Exclusion principle.

I am sure they don't cancel each other out, but that's not what I meant.
It's the pair (spin + orbit CW) against another pair (spin + orbit CCW) that produce the same magnetic field but cancels any gyroscopic effect because the mass of each is in the opposite direction.

Another thought is that if electrons could cause a gyroscopic effect at all then simply using a large coil and pushing electrons through it should cause a gyroscopic effect the same as a magnet made by a superconducting coil would have the gyroscopic effect.


The superconductor coil could be easily calculated for the gyroscopic effect if it existed but I can find nothing anywhere if anyone ever observed the effect in a superconducting magnet.

Eighthman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #34 on: April 08, 2016, 09:51:46 PM »
You can't feel any gyro effect in a wire conducting electricity because of drift velocity - very, very, very slow. Microscopic, indeed.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #35 on: April 09, 2016, 03:23:23 AM »
You can't feel any gyro effect in a wire conducting electricity because of drift velocity - very, very, very slow. Microscopic, indeed.

A typical superconductor, when operating, may have a current density of 10^6A/cm^2.
In a two-fluid approximation (there are superconducting electrons and normal electrons), at low temperatures all of the electrons are in the superconducting state so n~10^22/cm^3.
The charge is the electric charge (really 2e since they are paired into Cooper pairs), so take e=1.6x10^-19 C
Then we find that v(superconductor)=600cm/s as a rough order of magnitude answer.

It looks like if you put enough current through a superconducting coil, you could move the electrons along at about 600cm/s
That should be enough to detect some gyroscopic effect but once you calculate the mass of all those electrons I'd bet it's very small.

Even then the magnetic field generated would be huge in comparison.




verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #36 on: April 11, 2016, 01:44:01 AM »
Here is what all of rigorous Science uses as a definition of time: "We shall assume without examination the unidirectional, one-valued, one-dimensional character of the time continuum." Reciprocal Systems
Did you even read the entire article you quoted.  Did you understand it?
That article opposes the idea conveyed by the passage that you quoted.
I agree with the article, but I disagree with the quote.

Writing statements like "time is too fast to be considered" is just silly.
First of all your units of space are in error and too small.  Read the article again and the website it came from.

Secondly, the mere idea of the speed of time is contradictory because time is needed to measure speed....as well as space.
It is the ratio of space to time that forms the speed of light.

You really should read your sources, not just quote from them disjoint passages.

kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #37 on: April 11, 2016, 02:02:22 PM »
If you pick up a spinning gyroscope or any spinning mass, you will feel or see the effects of inertia and centrifugal force. The gyro will resist your efforts to twist away from the plane of its rotation.


OK, so why don't all permanent magnets do this? Do electrons have mass? Are they spinning? Are those spins aligned ( as the REASON WHY it has a magnetic field)? 


https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110405161715AAuefVm          I can't find any clear answer to this question. Indeed, it gets more weird as you look at it since some physics books claim that magnetism IS a form of centrifugal force.


I wonder if the answer to this question could open up some very important discoveries.

Electrons do move extremely fast, but their orbits are also extremely tight. Look up the current vector fields in the electron shell model used by Brilliant Light Power (formerly BlackLight Power). While according to theory they can orbit upwards of about 1/137th the speed of light (in the case of the ground state electron in a hydrogen atom), their orbits are on the order of 10^-10 meters radius, or 10^8 times less than your typical centimeter scale. Combine this with the fact that less than 1/1800th of the mass of a magnet is electrons, and less than 1/10th of that is unpaired electrons, you see that the angular momentum due to the unpaired electrons is actually very, very tiny. There is still plenty of energy to tap though, owing to the extremely high frequency of these rotations.

guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #38 on: April 11, 2016, 09:26:58 PM »
Secondly, the mere idea of the speed of time is contradictory because time is needed to measure speed....as well as space.
It is the ratio of space to time that forms the speed of light.

But what about the 'Time-Dilation' effect that  satellites  experience :
http://www.askamathematician.com/2012/03/q-satellites-experience-less-time-because-theyre-moving-fast-but-more-time-because-theyre-so-high-is-there-an-orbit-where-the-effects-cancel-out-is-that-useful/

 - What about if you walk past a desk, has time-for-you,  slowed down,  in comparison to time-for-the-desk, or in fact,  has time slowed down for both (  by an amount too small to be calculated ),  since you could claim the desk moved past you .

  And what about the outer-rim of a gyroscope-wheel,  or the electromotive-force( not the electrons ) running through a conductor( electricity is mostly electromotive-force ),   or,  the electrons themselves, which do something called  electron-drift in electrical-current .

    So,  in solid-state-devices,  and even in moving-parts-devices,  there must me some  'Time-Dilation' occuring .
     

Eighthman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #39 on: March 09, 2017, 07:24:47 PM »
http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_34.html


Protons spin also, so if they align with a magnetic field, then that should be noticeable, too. All the more so, if their mass is so much greater.


The above reference seems to attempt a sort of answer in that we may be looking at a quantum mechanical effect that isn't completely 'real' or coalesced into the real world of classical physics.  You have something called "spin" but it has no specific direction of rotation - until it leaves the quantum realm. The problem with this explanation is that..... how can we have a real world effect of a magnetic field generated by the quantum world but then NOT have any gyroscopic action connected with it? So, the magnet part is here but the rest got left behind.....?

Zephir

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • Reddit about Aether Wave Theory
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #40 on: March 09, 2017, 11:32:16 PM »
Quote
Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
The brief answer is: it actually feels and it's named Einstein–de Haas effect. Wikipedia says "the Einstein–de Haas effect demonstrates that spin angular momentum is indeed of the same nature as the angular momentum of rotating bodies as conceived in classical mechanics."

It's quite weak effect, though (1, 2).

Bertoa

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #41 on: March 10, 2017, 12:41:30 PM »
@ Eightman
When talking about a gyroscope we see a spinning (rotating) disk. I was experimenting with a linear movement of magnets and discovered a weak gyro effect. This is done with 2 magnets in a linear contra movement with a certain speed. The masses of the magnets form in resonance a gyroscopic entity. See video at 1.40 min.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQpNqSUz8Ws


e2matrix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1956
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #42 on: March 13, 2017, 06:22:04 PM »
It seems the answers here are over complicating this and the only one answer that seemed to catch the real issue (as much as I hate to admit it) was MileHigh's answer.   It seems obvious the dense mass of a gyroscope (most often metal) will be much so greater than the mass of some electrons that you will feel the effect whereas some electrons will not probably have enough mass to produce much measurable effect much less something you can "feel".   As it is no one has even seen an electron with the most powerful microscopes and one can assume their mass is a such a tiny amount compared to visible physical objects that it seems obvious they won't give anyone the 'feel' of a physical gyroscope.  As for Steven Mark's TPU claim - without any replications how can anyone put any weight on that subjective 'claim'.   Mass of an electron is very roughly .00000000000000000000000000009 grams.   Mass of a million electrons roughly .00000000000000000000009 grams.   Mass of a small hand held gyroscope roughly 300 grams.   

Zephir

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • Reddit about Aether Wave Theory
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #43 on: March 14, 2017, 12:12:55 PM »
The mass of electrons within atom isn't that low - the electron is just one thousand-times lighter than the proton and the number of protons and electrons must be balanced. Therefore the inertial effects of electrons should be just one thousand-times lower than the rest of magnet mass. OK, let say than only the unpaired electrons at the surface of atom participate on the spin, so that their inertia would be 1/50.000 of inertia of the whole magnet, but no lower. It should be measurable and in many cases it actually is.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S54yz7r-3w

e2matrix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1956
Re: Why Doesn't A Magnet 'Feel' Like A Gyroscope?
« Reply #44 on: March 14, 2017, 06:19:20 PM »
This thread is about comparing the supposed 'free' electrons around a magnet and not ones in an atom - to that of a solid object - a gyroscope.   Their weight is very very small - 9 x 10 to the -28th grams.   Compare that weight or the weight of a million or even a billion electrons to the weight of a gyroscope and the difference is huge.   Yes the weight can be measured with very sensitive measuring methods but I'm saying this is why you don't 'feel' a gyroscopic effect when holding a magnet.   Take a very thin piece of plastic cut into a flat round disk.   Spin it fast.  Do you feel the gryoscopic effect of that?   Probably not so how do you think a bunch of electrons will allow you to feel a gyroscopic effect.   It takes a fair amount of weight to actually 'feel' the effect and that's all I'm saying is this is why you don't feel the effect from a magnet as the OP asked.


I also question whether there are even electrons involved or if there is even such a thing as an electron.   I'm mostly with Ken Wheeler on this (and Tesla).   A quote from Ken Wheelers (Theoria Apohasis) book on Magnetism:
 "Tesla outright denied our current definition of the electron as a ‘discharge particle'.
     All electrons are a motional terminus of a quantity of dielectric pressure gradients of force (as reified by the incorrect
understanding of the definition of a ‘field’), these pressure gradients, or “lines” are contracting and stretching like rubber bands, giving
motion to the terminus ‘electron’. The thermionic ‘electron’ contracts, pulling the ‘electron’, the cathode ray stretching, pulled by the
‘electron’. In the former case the lines of force are dissipated, in the latter case the line of force are projected, in both cases these so-
called ‘electrons’ assume radial motions, with non participating pressure gradients, or forces filling the ‘voids’, directing the
‘electrons’. Hence, it is the so-called ‘electrons’ (dielectric radial discharges) that travel in straight lines, that is, radially. ‘Electrons’
have nothing to do with the flow of electricity; the so-called ‘electrons’ are the rate at which electricity is destroyed. ‘Electrons’ are in
fact the resistance. From extensive experimental work into atomic electrical science by J. J. Thompson, and Nikola Tesla, it is
established that the so-called electron is only a shadow; its apparent-only physical mass is merely an electrical momentum (ejected by the dielectric interia in disturbance. There is no rest mass to an electron nor could there be logically, a rest-electron ‘bead’;   such notions are absurd and evidence proven non-existent. The very premise is logically impossible and contradicts the rational physics of atomic charges and discharges.