PDA

View Full Version : Understanding magnets - with EFD and the SPM lens


amigo
10-14-2007, 08:49 PM
This by Steve Bowman (http://members.lycos.co.uk/sbowman/index.html), very nice document on how magnets work, attached here for posterity.

And I must say we all gotta get a hold of that Superparamagnetic Lens ;)

amigo
10-14-2007, 09:07 PM
The lens is available from Magnetostatics (http://www.magnetostatics.us/), no mention of the price. Anyone dares to email and enquire? :)

Jetijs
10-14-2007, 10:01 PM
Looks like an improved magnetic field viewing film, like this one:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/strunti2/1181848543.jpg
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/strunti2/1181848541.jpg
You can buy that kind of films on ebay and it is not very expensive :)

amigo
10-14-2007, 11:11 PM
Yeah I've been meaning to buy some of that film and somehow I never end up doing so. Matter a fact I'll go look now... :)

adam ant
10-15-2007, 01:52 PM
http://members.lycos.co.uk/sbowman/images/Another%20moebius-annotated-3.gif



two spinning vortexes with a spinning torroidal disc in the middle... this is what i was trying to say before.

take this 2D image and mentally spin it on its axis...

amigo
10-15-2007, 11:03 PM
"There is something to be said for clarity..."

There are 3 axes, which one? :)

adam ant
10-16-2007, 01:01 AM
just follow the pictures "spin arrows"

draw a line from the north to the south, along the y axis.

there is something in this techology that is not sitting right with me though... let me think on it for a while. if you look at the machine taking these "photos" there is a steel or aluminum housing surrounding the magnet. i think it is causing an "squashed" appearance to the magnetic field.
do you see where the gold arc goes right through the labelled "s" at the top, and the "n" at the bottom? this should extend out farther than the ends of the magnets. it is a bit perculiar. also, the torroidal (zero point spin disk as they call it) should be slightly wider.

amigo
10-16-2007, 01:52 AM
just follow the pictures "spin arrows"

draw a line from the north to the south, along the y axis.

there is something in this techology that is not sitting right with me though... let me think on it for a while. if you look at the machine taking these "photos" there is a steel or aluminum housing surrounding the magnet. i think it is causing an "squashed" appearance to the magnetic field.
do you see where the gold arc goes right through the labelled "s" at the top, and the "n" at the bottom? this should extend out farther than the ends of the magnets. it is a bit perculiar. also, the torroidal (zero point spin disk as they call it) should be slightly wider.

I see what you mean now, sorry I'm left handed so sometimes what other people consider obvious it escapes me, and vice versa. :)

You are right about possible distortions, but it might be that it's shot on an angle as well and that's why we are seeing this kind of curvature.
Since that SPM is two pieces of glass sandwiching a thin layer of nano-particles, it is possible that the steel or aluminium ring housing the assembly is causing the distortion.
If true that's a pretty bad oversight on the manufacturer part and lack of full R&D and QE. They could've used ceramics or some plastic or anything but metal...

adam ant
10-16-2007, 03:47 PM
tell me the difference between magnetism and electricity...

amigo
10-16-2007, 11:41 PM
I dare not - Tesla himself couldn't define what electricity is and I'm a far smaller person than he ever was. :o

Aaron
10-17-2007, 03:50 AM
One can help cause the other. However, each one can perfectly exist without the other. They are compliments and not opposites.

Tesla used the term electricity to describe the aetheric electricity of nature and not voltage with "electron" current in a wire lighting a bulb.

dyetalon
11-03-2007, 12:50 AM
I see what you mean now, sorry I'm left handed so sometimes what other people consider obvious it escapes me, and vice versa. :)

You are right about possible distortions, but it might be that it's shot on an angle as well and that's why we are seeing this kind of curvature.
Since that SPM is two pieces of glass sandwiching a thin layer of nano-particles, it is possible that the steel or aluminium ring housing the assembly is causing the distortion.
If true that's a pretty bad oversight on the manufacturer part and lack of full R&D and QE. They could've used ceramics or some plastic or anything but metal...

Steve did a poor job of 'cut and paste' with that image.
You can see the original here: http://www.magnetostatics.us/l1i5g6o5n8ier/Another%20moebius.jpg

There's no metal ring around the circumference of the lens. The glass sheets are sealed with UV optical adhesive (Norland #63).
You can get a better idea of how the nano-particles respond to a magnetic field here: Nanomagnetics.us (http://www.nanomagnetics.us)
This website should be up and running by the end of the year.

:)

adam ant
11-03-2007, 02:01 PM
not on the lens itself, the housing or base of the unit. in the PDF file there is a photo which (unclearly) shows some sort of metallic container or device on the bottom. corrct me if i am wrong.

dyetalon
11-03-2007, 04:38 PM
not on the lens itself, the housing or base of the unit. in the PDF file there is a photo which (unclearly) shows some sort of metallic container or device on the bottom. corrct me if i am wrong.

There is no metal supporting the lens, or encasing it. I'm not sure what you see, but it may be the support bracket for the incandescent lamp I used for illumination.

The test jig I used for capturing this image consists of a PVC ring painted flat black that supports the lens, and it's mounted on a movable stage (up-down) like an optical microscope uses. Below the lens assembly is another PVC housing painted black that the light source is contained in. The mounting hardware is brass and aluminum (non-ferrous).

I can upload the test jig on my server for you to view, if you desire- and provide a link to it here.

:)

adam ant
11-03-2007, 09:57 PM
not necessary, i just wanted to make sure of exactly what i was looking at.

dyetalon
05-12-2008, 05:39 PM
This by Steve Bowman (http://members.lycos.co.uk/sbowman/index.html), very nice document on how magnets work, attached here for posterity.

And I must say we all gotta get a hold of that Superparamagnetic Lens ;)

Just thought I would provide a link to the updated paper that Steve Bowman has written on "How magnets work": http://www.nanomagnetics.us/Understanding%20Magnets%20-2008-1.1.pdf
:D

amigo
05-14-2008, 01:19 AM
Thanks for the update. :)

Rectified
03-14-2009, 05:19 AM
[QUOTE=Aaron;10787]One can help cause the other. However, each one can perfectly exist without the other. They are compliments and not opposites.
QUOTE]

Could you guide me to any information on that, Iím unaware of that ever being scientifically proven.
Thanks in advance. Rectified

Aaron
03-14-2009, 06:06 AM
Hi Rectified,

Was the context of that about voltage and current existing independent of each other?

If so, any battery with voltage at the terminals is voltage existing with current. In a form being used to do something, voltage potential like an inductive spike ideally is also voltage without current and is therefore "cold."

A permanent magnet is magnetic current at zero voltage so there is current with no voltage.

For example, here is an electromagnet that is charged and connected in such a way that after it is charged, the current continues to remain at several amps constantly forever until the circuit is disconnected and the field collapses giving an inductive voltage spike...but until then..the current exists with zero voltage while the magnetic field is there doing work holding onto a bar with zero other input.
Emery Version - Leedskalnin Perpetual Motion Holder - KeelyNet 06/05/03 (http://keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm)

Aaron
03-14-2009, 06:06 AM
Hi Rectified,

Was the context of that about voltage and current existing independent of each other?

If so, any battery with voltage at the terminals is voltage existing without (meant to say without) current. In a form being used to do something, voltage potential like an inductive spike ideally is also voltage without current and is therefore "cold."

A permanent magnet is magnetic current at zero voltage so there is current with no voltage.

For example, here is an electromagnet that is charged and connected in such a way that after it is charged, the current continues to remain at several amps constantly forever until the circuit is disconnected and the field collapses giving an inductive voltage spike...but until then..the current exists with zero voltage while the magnetic field is there doing work holding onto a bar with zero other input.
Emery Version - Leedskalnin Perpetual Motion Holder - KeelyNet 06/05/03 (http://keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm)

There are other systems with current and zero to negative voltage again showing they can each do things on their own without the other.

Rectified
03-14-2009, 11:11 PM
Hi Rectified,

Was the context of that about voltage and current existing independent of each other?

If so, any battery with voltage at the terminals is voltage existing with current. In a form being used to do something, voltage potential like an inductive spike ideally is also voltage without current and is therefore "cold."

A permanent magnet is magnetic current at zero voltage so there is current with no voltage.

For example, here is an electromagnet that is charged and connected in such a way that after it is charged, the current continues to remain at several amps constantly forever until the circuit is disconnected and the field collapses giving an inductive voltage spike...but until then..the current exists with zero voltage while the magnetic field is there doing work holding onto a bar with zero other input.
Emery Version - Leedskalnin Perpetual Motion Holder - KeelyNet 06/05/03 (http://keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm)

There are other systems with current and zero to negative voltage again showing they can each do things on their own without the other.

Aron

Iím sorry but I see so many struggling to learn, unable to develop correct basic electronics concepts and principles. Itís difficult for many to understand what current is when electronic terms seem to be used out of context. Voltage is defined as the potential difference across a conductor when a current flows. Electromotive Force (EMF) is measured in Volts that causes the flow of electricity from one point to another. Whenever the charge potential moves it can then be measured in Volts, that = amps times ohms. The faster the Voltage moves, the higher the amperage. Even at the microscopic level there is movement

Current = speed.
Voltage = Force
Ohms = resistance

How would you apply Ohms law to your statement? Voltage is a unit of measurement.
When following along on numerous group postings its easy to see by the questions others ask, or the conclusions they perceive from their experiments how important statements made need to be clarified. The wrong analogy forms a learning barrier which can prevent further progress toward understanding. Thanks for the link you provided however it seems to disagree with your statement when correctly understanding what is taking place.
Rectified

Aaron
03-15-2009, 03:26 AM
Rectified,

I edited one word in my 2nd sentence in my post...voltage at a battery is the potential withOUT current.

"Voltage is defined as the potential difference across a conductor when a current flows"

Voltage is the potential difference regardless of if there is current is flowing or not. If you measure a 12v battery and it is at 12 volts...you have a 12 volt potential difference between the terminals with zero current flowing in an open loop. If you close this loop with a light bulb, maybe the battery will show 11.5 volts...so you have 11.5 volts of potential difference between the terminals in this closed loop with current flowing. Bottom line is that a voltage can be there with no current.

"Electromotive Force (EMF) is measured in Volts that causes the flow of electricity from one point to another. Whenever the charge potential moves it can then be measured in Volts, that = amps times ohms"

This depends on your definition of electricity...normal "electricity" is made of three components...the positive potential moving over a closed loop from pos to neg terminal...the negative potential moving over a closed loop from the neg to pos terminal...the electrons moving from the copper atoms that make up the wire moving to the positive terminal. The voltage doesn't directly cause the flow of this "electricity"...closing the loop in a typical circuit is what allows the current (electron flow) to flow. Again, you can measure a potential difference from any potential source and the voltage is there whether or not there is any amperage moving or not.

"The faster the Voltage moves, the higher the amperage."

In a closed loop, the voltage potential is pretty much fixed at a little below light speed and you're not going to change that in a typical circuit. The amperage has nothing to do with the "speed" of voltage as you can have higher or lower amperage in a circuit at the same voltage and the voltage is going to be the same speed. Inversely, you can have a certain amperage with low or high voltage...and again...the speed of the voltage is the same in both cases.

Rectified
03-15-2009, 08:37 AM
"Voltage is the potential difference regardless of if there is current is flowing or not. If you measure a 12v battery and it is at 12 volts...you have a 12 volt potential difference between the terminals with zero current flowing in an open loop. If you close this loop with a light bulb, maybe the battery will show 11.5 volts...so you have 11.5 volts of potential difference between the terminals in this closed loop with current flowing. Bottom line is that a voltage can be there with no current.

You are putting a load on the battery with your meter closing the loop

"Electromotive Force (EMF) is measured in Volts that causes the flow of electricity from one point to another. Whenever the charge potential moves it can then be measured in Volts, that = amps times ohms"

This depends on your definition of electricity...normal "electricity" is made of three components...the positive potential moving over a closed loop from pos to neg terminal...the negative potential moving over a closed loop from the neg to pos terminal...the electrons moving from the copper atoms that make up the wire moving to the positive terminal. The voltage doesn't directly cause the flow of this "electricity"...closing the loop in a typical circuit is what allows the current (electron flow) to flow. Again, you can measure a potential difference from any potential source and the voltage is there whether or not there is any amperage moving or not.

As I previously stated Voltage is a unit of measurment of the EMF. OHMS law! Will reply to this statment with more info soon.

"The faster the Voltage moves, the higher the amperage."

In a closed loop, the voltage potential is pretty much fixed at a little below light speed and you're not going to change that in a typical circuit.

Another misconception.. do the math and you will see

The amperage has nothing to do with the "speed" of voltage as you can have higher or lower amperage in a circuit at the same voltage and the voltage is going to be the same speed. Inversely, you can have a certain amperage with low or high voltage...and again...the speed of the voltage is the same in both cases.[/QUOTE]



Aron

Over the past 50+ years I have had to review countless resumes and conduct interviews when hiring electronic technicians. Many have had simulator misconceptions of electronic fundamentals. When teaching physic, instructors often say they first need to un-teach many students what they had previously learned, do to bad examples and teachers that truly donít understand electronics and forced to use publications riddled with errors. It always seems harder to except change when egoís and publishers reputation are involved. As time goes by many use electronic terminology incorrectly or examples that adds to the misconceptions others develop. Understanding electronics will be more difficult for many than it needs to be when fundamentals are not understood correctly. You will be shocked when you learn just how slow current is compared to the speed of light. I will be happy to provide you with more information to consider at a later date but I donít want to hijack this thread and must get some sleep. With an open mind much can be learned.
Take care Rectified

Aaron
03-15-2009, 09:55 AM
You will be shocked when you learn just how slow current is compared to the speed of light.

Just on one point here, in normal terms...voltage isn't current...voltage is voltage and electron current is the current or amperage...the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed.

Everything I told you is accurate.

For one, if you are trying to point out to me that I would be shocked to learn how slow current is compared to the speed of light, what is apparent is that you have not understood anything I wrote, respectfully.

Aaron
03-15-2009, 10:09 AM
You are putting a load on the battery with your meter closing the loop

The potential on a dipole is there with or without a meter closing the loop.

Here are 34 fundamental flaws in conventional EM theory:

Flaws in Classical EM Theory 1. Eliminates the Internal EM Inside the
Scalar Potential.
2. No Definition of Electrical Charge or
of Scalar Potential.
3. Equations Still Assume Material Ether
Per Maxwell (Unchanged).
4. Use of Force Fields in Vacuum is False
(and Known to be So).
5. Treats Charge q as Unitary Instead of
Coupled System q=Ý(q)m(q).
6. Confuses Massless Potential Gradients
as Forces (See #3, #4).
7. Does Not Utilize Mass as a Component
of Force (See #23).
8. Erroneously Assumes EM Force Field as
Primary Causes.
9. Topology of EM Model Has Been Substantially
Reduced.
10. Does Not Include Quantum Potential or Action
at a Distance.
11. Does Not Include Superluminal Velocity of Inner
EM Components.
12. Does Not Utilize Extended Near-Field Coulomb
Gauge Effects.
13. Does Not Include EM Generatrix Mechanism
For Time Flow.
14. Does Not Unify Photon and Wave Aspects
(Requires 7-D Model).
15. Does Not Include Electron Spin and Precession
(See #19, #24).
16. Treats EM Energy As Existing in "Chunks,"
Instead of as Flow.
17. Confuses Energy and Energy Collection
(See #16).
18. Discards Half of Every EM Wave in Vacuum
(See #22).
19. Erroneously Uses Transverse Vacuum Wave;
It's Quasi-Longitudinal.
20. Arbitrarily Regauges Maxwell's Equations to
Eliminate Overunity Maxwellian Systems.

21. Omits Phase Conjugate Optics Effects
(Which are the Rule in Internal EM).

22. Does Not Include EM Cause of Newtonian
Reaction Force.

23. Erroneously Assumes Separate Force Acting
on Separate Mass.

24. Confuses Detected Electron Precession Waves
as Proving Transverse EM Waves in Vacuum
(Remnant of Old "EM Fluid" Concept).
25. Due to Error in String Wave, Omits the
Ubiquitous Antiwave.
26. Assumes Equilibrium; Not True Unless Include
Vacuum Interactions.
27. Higher Toplogy Required, to Model
Electromagnetic Reality.

28. Lorentz surface integration discards Poynting
energy transport.

29. Has nothing at all to say about form of
EM entities in massless space.
30. Eliminates the infolded general relativity using
EM-force as curve agent.
31. Does not include longitudinal EM wave phase
conjugate pairs as time domain oscillations.
32. Does not include EM mechanism that generates
time flow and flow rate.
33. Does not include time-excitation charging
and decay.
34. Does not include time-reversal zones.

@ T.E.BEARDEN 1999

Raui
03-15-2009, 10:55 AM
There's a difference between the electrostatic phenomenon, magnetism phenomenon and electromagnetic phenomenon. Electrostatic has got to do with your potentials, magnetisim has got to do with your current and electromagnetism is a combination of the two phenomenon.

Think of it like this, I have an electret in a state of equilibrium and a coil of wire which is attached to an incandescent bulb. Nothing happens. If I have a magnet in a state of equilibrium and a coil of wire which is attached to a an incandescent bulb nothing happens either.

If this magnet however is spun the measurements read on your meter are as follows;
Current is proportional TO THE STRENGTH OF THE MAGNET.
Voltage is proportional to the velocity of the magnet.

I don't have an electret to test with otherwise I am sure I could find an analogy to magnetism where the strength of the electret is proportional to the voltage and current proportional to the change in equilibrium of the electret. If anyone doesn't understand what I am saying I'll reword.

Regards,
Raui

Rectified
03-16-2009, 07:08 AM
Hi Raui
I understand what you are saying.

The issue I was trying to address with Aron was the statement he made in reference to Voltage and current. I have been in the field of electronics for more than 50+ years and have encountered many that fail to understand Voltage and current accurately. It becomes even more difficult to contribute to a conversation to discuss other issues pertaining to magnetism such as Skin Effect, Fermi Surface, Movable electron versus locked electrons, thermal/quantum random motion speeds etc. Itís not as thou we are disputation Wolfgang Pauli exclusion and conservation of energy hypothesis, Rather just fundamental ohms Law that has been used to send space crafts to other planets and to build millions of circuits by those of us that understand itís most basic principles.
Take Care Rectified

Rectified
03-16-2009, 07:22 AM
Hi Aron

When corresponding with you it seems as thou Iím talking to two different people.

Did you or did you not say Post #22

The amperage has nothing to do with the "speed" of voltage as you can have higher or lower amperage in a circuit at the same voltage and the voltage is going to be the same speed. Inversely, you can have a certain amperage with low or high voltage...and again...the speed of the voltage is the same in both cases.

And now you say

post # 24

Just on one point here, in normal terms...voltage isn't current...voltage is voltage and electron current is the current or amperage...the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed.

Everything I told you is accurate.

For one, if you are trying to point out to me that I would be shocked to learn how slow current is compared to the speed of light, what is apparent is that you have not understood anything I wrote, respectfully.


Iím sorry that I am unable explain in word that are more helpful to you. My colleague and I have used Ohms law successfully for more years than we care to mention. To say at one point Amperage has nothing to do with speed and then say the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed is makes it more than clear this conversation is futile. :wall:

Rectified

sucahyo
03-16-2009, 08:44 AM
@Rectified, are you trying to say that current must be accompanied with voltage?

@Aaron, can you give another example of current without voltage, not involving magnet?

Are there any example of current generator or current storage? From any generator example, it is possible to generate very high potential (voltage) with very low current. How do we generate/store very high current without voltage?

Raui
03-16-2009, 08:52 AM
Rectified,

While I am not Aaron I might be able to offer a neutral response to what you've said. Folks like Aaron and myself experiment with circuits and effects which are different to what you have most probably worked with for the past 50 years.

I'd say we know just about everything there is to know about closed loop systems, which is what you and every other qualified electrician/EE works with. We however approach circuits with an open loop and a perfect open loop system will almost every time/never be in an equilibrium state.

It is due to this fact the laws of thermodynamics might not hold for 2 reasons, 1 they were formulated before we even discovered the electromagnetic phenomenon and 2 because we are not dealing with a system in equilibrium.

Also why is Ohms Law going to hold when we don't have current? Your used to dealing with circuits that utilize electricity and magnetic compnents (the electromagnetic phenomenon) whilst most of us deal with purely an electrical phenomenon.

Hope this clears any misunderstanding up. Also I might point out to you that I don't have am only 17 and don't have a thorough education on what science currently accepts which I suppose is advantageous to me as I am not bound by the laws that you are. This has allowed me to investigate other phenomenon and not just pass it off because it breaks the 'known laws of physics'.

Raui

Raui
03-16-2009, 08:57 AM
Sucahyo I coud give you many examples; Whimshurt machine, "Kelvin's thunderstorm", Van-DeGraaff Generator or basically any electrostatic generator. As for storage well a leyden jar sounds pretty suffice to me. Think electrostatics and you will have your answers ;)

Aaron
03-16-2009, 08:24 PM
Rectified,

What I am saying is very consistent. I believe the confusion is that are trying to fit what I'm saying into your context, which isn't compatible and this is why you think you're seeing something different.

Voltage is an indication of the PRESSURE of the Heaviside flow over the wire which has its positive component moving from the positive terminal over the wire towards the negative terminal....this PRESSURE of the Heaviside flow is called VOLTAGE. This is NOT speed of the voltage and it is NOT electron current. The negative component of the Heaviside flow over the wire moves from the negative terminal to the positive terminal over the wire....in a normal closed loop, the positive and negative are fairly equal.

This Heaviside flow moving over the surface of the wire is moving at a little under light speed in a closed loop.

A very, very, very small part of the positive Heaviside flow is attracted to the negative charge of the electrons of the copper atoms that make up the wire. As the small part of the Heaviside flow is attracted towards the electrons...the most easily liberated electrons are in the third electron field of the copper atom. That electron is attracted towards the positive terminal since it is attracted to the high potential or opposite charge. The electron jumps orbit and moves to the atom next to it and moves into third electron field of the atom next to it, which was depleted of an electron by the attraction of the positive Heaviside flow and that goes on and on at a very slow migration speed.

These electrons do this at the speed of a few inches per hour slowly migrating in the direction of the positive terminal.

These electrons moving are what AMPERAGE is and has nothing to do with the speed of the voltage...the speed of the Heaviside flow is fairly fixed in a closed loop (little under speed of light)....this causes the electrons to move at a few inches per hour as described above.

I fail to see what is difficult to understand about this and why anyone would or could confuse the issue.

In a closed loop where the positive and negative component of the Heaviside flow are pretty much inversely equal...Ohm's Law is accurate as far as the math but just because that is so - reading into this and thinking that amperage and speed of voltage is the same thing or connected is a misunderstanding of what is happening on an electric circuit in not only my opinion but in fairly well established published science.

A battery charged up just sitting on the table has a voltage potential whether or not you have a meter on it to read the voltage by making the voltage moving over a known resistance....there is a potential sitting at the terminal even if never connecting anything to it and it is there even if you don't make it move over a known resistance...and even amp meters don't even measure current and this is a fact.

The amp meter only reads the Heaviside flow period. The amp meter reads nothing but voltage or the pressure of the Heaviside flow over different resistances and based on the pressure of the flow combined with different resistances, it will tell you what the current is "supposed to be" based on the math but no amp meter directly measure current, period. The meters measure voltage that is it.

Current can flow over a circuit, through an inductor to charge it with a magnetic field at ZERO or NEGATIVE voltage. If you know what potential and energy are, then you know how to manipulate the circuit so a capacitor for example discharges into a coil at negative resistance - the coil will offer a negative impedance and a negative induction violating ohm's law, faraday's law of induction, lenz's law...and the first and second law of thermodynamics...and it isn't necessarily electron current that is charging the coil it is magnetic current...and the loop for the most part is still closed...but the potential is sent in impulses so that the equilibrium or symmetry of the pos and neg is no longer there...it is an asymetrical situation on a closed loop now where the negative part of the Heaviside flow is inversly greater than the positive potential.

Rectified, it is clear you understand the conventional understanding of ohm's law and I agree it applies in a conventional circuit with a closed loop but that is a separate issue from understanding what the voltage is and where it comes from.




When corresponding with you it seems as thou Iím talking to two different people.

Did you or did you not say Post #22

The amperage has nothing to do with the "speed" of voltage as you can have higher or lower amperage in a circuit at the same voltage and the voltage is going to be the same speed. Inversely, you can have a certain amperage with low or high voltage...and again...the speed of the voltage is the same in both cases.

And now you say

post # 24

Just on one point here, in normal terms...voltage isn't current...voltage is voltage and electron current is the current or amperage...the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed.

Everything I told you is accurate.

For one, if you are trying to point out to me that I would be shocked to learn how slow current is compared to the speed of light, what is apparent is that you have not understood anything I wrote, respectfully.


Iím sorry that I am unable explain in word that are more helpful to you. My colleague and I have used Ohms law successfully for more years than we care to mention. To say at one point Amperage has nothing to do with speed and then say the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed is makes it more than clear this conversation is futile. :wall:

Rectified

sucahyo
03-17-2009, 01:53 AM
Sucahyo I coud give you many examples; Whimshurt machine, "Kelvin's thunderstorm", Van-DeGraaff Generator or basically any electrostatic generator. As for storage well a leyden jar sounds pretty suffice to me. Think electrostatics and you will have your answers ;)Aren't that all generator of high voltage with very little current? I ask for the opposite, generator of very high current with very little voltage.


About weird phenomenon, I wonder how we can measure it? Maybe you mention a current without voltage because you can't measure the voltage even if it exist?

Or you call potential different of aether and physical differently from voltage (plus is in aether, minus is in physical)? something like aether potential?

@Aaron, do Bedini scalar device has electron move slower than light too? Or is that because it is different from Erick Dollard experiment?

Raui
03-17-2009, 05:02 AM
Ahh sorry suchayo I misread your post. None the less I can answer your question still partially. When you generate electricity with a generator the current is based off your magnet and the amount of turns in your coil. The speed of the rotation of the magnet defines the voltage. Therefore a high current low voltage situation would be a massive magnetic field rotating in a coil of many turns at a slow rate.

A perfect all current/no voltage would be a magnet. Our meters can only read when both electrical (potentials) and magnetism (current) are present in a coil of wire. By themselves they are only potentials and nothing that our electromagnetic meters can read.

Raui

Aaron
03-17-2009, 06:15 AM
The Faraday type motors, N machine - are high current and low voltage but the reference I made to a coil with current literally has no positive voltage involved.

Rectified
03-17-2009, 10:41 AM
Aron reply
What I am saying is very consistent.

R reply
Did you or did you not say Post #22

The amperage has nothing to do with the "speed" of voltage as you can have higher or lower amperage in a circuit at the same voltage and the voltage is going to be the same speed. Inversely, you can have a certain amperage with low or high voltage...and again...the speed of the voltage is the same in both cases.

post # 24

Just on one point here, in normal terms...voltage isn't current...voltage is voltage and electron current is the current or amperage...the electron current, which is rated in amperage is moving at a few inches per hour while the voltage is moving at a little under light speed.

Everything I told you is accurate.

I believe the confusion is that are trying to fit what I'm saying into your context, which isn't compatible and this is why you think you're seeing something different.

R reply

According to Si system of units Electron potential. The terminal voltage of a cell that is not discharging is called its electromotive force (emf), and has the same unit as electrical potential. The electric potential is defined as the amount of "work" needed to move an electric charge from one point to the other. This shows the amount of work that is flowing from the first point to the second and how much it can perform. Current is the rate of electric charge motion through a conductor.
To be able to make meaningful statements about these quantities in circuits, we need to be able to describe their quantities in the same way that we might quantify mass, temperature, volume, length, or any other kind of physical quantity, therefore Voltage without Current or Current without Voltage is meaningless one can not exist without the other. I never said they were the same. They are two units of measurement. You said you could have one without the other, not me. My reply is based well-established Ohms law context. Your statements contradict your self.-period.



A :

Voltage is an indication of the PRESSURE of the Heaviside flow over the wire which has its positive component moving from the positive terminal over the wire towards the negative terminal....this PRESSURE of the Heaviside flow is called VOLTAGE. This is NOT speed of the voltage and it is NOT electron current. The negative component of the Heaviside flow over the wire moves from the negative terminal to the positive terminal over the wire....in a normal closed loop, the positive and negative are fairly equal.

This Heaviside flow moving over the surface of the wire is moving at a little under light speed in a closed loop.

A very, very, very small part of the positive Heaviside flow is attracted to the negative charge of the electrons of the copper atoms that make up the wire. As the small part of the Heaviside flow is attracted towards the electrons...the most easily liberated electrons are in the third electron field of the copper atom. That electron is attracted towards the positive terminal since it is attracted to the high potential or opposite charge. The electron jumps orbit and moves to the atom next to it and moves into third electron field of the atom next to it, which was depleted of an electron by the attraction of the positive Heaviside flow and that goes on and on at a very slow migration speed.

These electrons do this at the speed of a few inches per hour slowly migrating in the direction of the positive terminal.

These electrons moving are what AMPERAGE is and has nothing to do with the speed of the voltage...the speed of the Heaviside flow is fairly fixed in a closed loop (little under speed of light)....this causes the electrons to move at a few inches per hour as described above.

I fail to see what is difficult to understand about this and why anyone would or could confuse the issue.

In a closed loop where the positive and negative component of the Heaviside flow are pretty much inversely equal...Ohm's Law is accurate as far as the math but just because that is so - reading into this and thinking that amperage and speed of voltage is the same thing or connected is a misunderstanding of what is happening on an electric circuit in not only my opinion but in fairly well established published science.


R: reply
I have read many such claims, well established and publish Science is and always will be debated as most theories are. The actual number of electrons which contribute to the electrical current is not equal to the number of electrons in the conduction band. The electrons which contribute to electrical conduction are those electrons within the Fermi Surface which are "uncompensated." From symmetry, these electrons lie on, or near the surface, and result as the Fermi Surface is "shifted" by the electric field. The fraction of electrons that remain uncompensated is approximately given by the ratio (drift velocity)/(Fermi velocity). The result is the number of electrons which produce an observed current being considerably less than Avagadro's number. ďHUGHĒ The number of electrons producing current being thus reduced as is predicted by the free-electron theory. No more than two (with opposite spins) electrons can occupy a given state. When two electrons collide, their final states must have the same total energy and the final states must have been vacant. Thus, if all the states which can be reached at a given energy level are already filled, then the two electrons cannot collide. Net result is that electrons in low energy states are "stuck" in those states. So only the relatively few electrons in high energy states are really available to participate, but most of the other electrons are not available to collide with the high energy electrons. Just another Theory to think about



A:
A battery charged up just sitting on the table has a voltage potential whether or not you have a meter on it to read the voltage by making the voltage moving over a known resistance....there is a potential sitting at the terminal even if never connecting anything to it and it is there even if you don't make it move over a known resistance...and even amp meters don't even measure current and this is a fact.

The amp meter only reads the Heaviside flow period. The amp meter reads nothing but voltage or the pressure of the Heaviside flow over different resistances and based on the pressure of the flow combined with different resistances, it will tell you what the current is "supposed to be" based on the math but no amp meter directly measure current, period. The meters measure voltage that is it.

R:
Once again I will respectfully disagree, and not all Amp meters work by that method.

A:
Current can flow over a circuit, through an inductor to charge it with a magnetic field at ZERO or NEGATIVE voltage. If you know what potential and energy are, then you know how to manipulate the circuit so a capacitor for example discharges into a coil at negative resistance - the coil will offer a negative impedance and a negative induction violating ohm's law, faraday's law of induction, lenz's law...and the first and second law of thermodynamics...and it isn't necessarily electron current that is charging the coil it is magnetic current...and the loop for the most part is still closed...but the potential is sent in impulses so that the equilibrium or symmetry of the pos and neg is no longer there...it is an asymetrical situation on a closed loop now where the negative part of the Heaviside flow is inversly greater than the positive potential.

Rectified, it is clear you understand the conventional understanding of ohm's law and I agree it applies in a conventional circuit with a closed loop but that is a separate issue from understanding what the voltage is and where it comes from.


R:
Theories can muddy the waters for others that are learning.

In every field there are Basic terms used that follow a specific protocol In physics, chemistry, agriculture and Electronics etc. When in an environment where there are others trying to learn it helps to use basic astonished terms and procedures. Many find it helpful to be corrected when learning basic principles and some are offended. I have know desire to offend anyone but would only encourage those that want to learn search the net themselves and see if they can see the difference. You will find some that vary so look at a few interpretations. The basics concepts will be close enough to understand. I have built many projects from hydrogen and cold fusion reactors, and circuits that produce more output than input using the basic correctly. In to days world there are many formulas that still apply yet need to be understood for specific use, then with additional elements added where other issues were lacking they can apply for the most part.
I am all for the research being done here and elsewhere just hate to see known laws of electronics used incorrectly. When you try to use terms differently then the way they where intended and are used by others, itís know wonder they donít except or believe in our efforts, is it. Old terminology should be left alone, yet knew ones created. Less miscomunication. At this point, I guess itís best to respectfully agree to disagree on a few issues and leave it at that.
Rectified

Raui
03-17-2009, 09:42 PM
I agree with you Rectified that all of us investigating shouldn't re-write the laws however we are not dealing with conventional circuits so perhaps conventional terminology are in need of a new definition when dealing with what we are dealing with?

For one I feel and I am sure many would agree that we are dealing with a more electrostatic phenomenon. Tesla has even hinted this in his writings "Starting with the idea of producing electro-magnetic waves, they turned their attention, perhaps, too much to the study of electro-magnetic effects, and neglected the study of electrostatic phenomena.".

So straight away Ohm's law isn't of any help. Except for transient phenomenon but this is only a very quick transient. At this moment, for instance when a Bonetti machine fires, the current maybe measured as I = q/t (where q is charge and t is time). This is only at very specific times that even ohm's law, one of the most used laws in electromagnetics, is useless. Yes things like potential should have the same definition however when dealing with the same thing all day everyday and never creeping out into the woods we will never find a contradiction so therefore we have to try new things, perhaps with a better investigation into the electrostatic phenomenon we will find anomalies in our current terminology.

Btw, I'm not trying to attack you Rectified. You seem like an intelligent man with alot of experience with electromagnetic circuits.

Raui

Aaron
03-18-2009, 12:47 AM
Rectified,

I don't contradict myself, I'm very clear in what I'm communicating. You're taking what I say out of context.

At Energetic Forum all ideas and opinions are welcome so feel free to start any thread you want to explain about your view of the fundamentals as it will help anyone that vibes with your explanation.

Voltage and current can exist independently and just because the model or knowledge doesn't permit it doesn't mean they can't exist independently. It is easy to create a current to make a magnetic field in a coil, allows the current to flow and maintain in the coil while producing a magnetic field and there is zero voltage - no potential difference in any part of the circuit...whether or not you believe it is one thing but the reality is that it can be done, is being done, I can do it and so can anyone else for the cost of a few large pizzas for good scale or for much less.

If we allow ourselves to be open-minded enough, we might just see these things regardless of what the math says. What you are quoting appears to apply to only closed systems that are in thermodynamic equilibrium...they wind down until there is nothing left and there is no input from environmental sources. The whole point to these other technologies that we're dealing with is that they are open systems that can produce over 1.0 COP because there is free environmental input that takes the system out of equilibrium and therefore the math, theories and laws that govern the equilibrium systems no longer have any jurisdiction. This is a fact.

Keep in mind that results are the bottom line and if results counter the theory or law, the theory or law is wrong, period. I'm saying they're wrong if there are any claims that the laws apply across the board to everything no matter what...otherwise, they are conditions that only apply to closed loop equilibrium systems.

sucahyo
03-18-2009, 04:32 AM
@Raui, the high current low voltage that I imagine is it would not generate spark on any size of spark gap but will pulverize the conductor in a flash. Since a very high voltage low current spark won't heating up the air even if the spark gap is big.

Do the magnetic flux really is the same as electric current that you seems to refer both as same?

I can't find info of what magnetic current is in wiki, so this is not the way we supposed to call it:

Search results
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You searched for "magnetic current" (all pages starting with ""magnetic current"" | all pages that link to ""magnetic current"")
No article title matches

Magnetic potential - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_vector_potential)
The magnetic potential provides a mathematical way to define a magnetic field in classical electromagnetism. It is analogous to the electric potential which defines the electric field in electrostatics. Like the electric potential, it is not directly observable - only the field it describes may be measured. There are two ways to define this potential - as a scalar and as a vector potential. (Note, however, that the magnetic vector potential is used much more often than the magnetic scalar potential.)


@Aaron, how can we call a difference in voltage positive or negative? it would always be positive shouldn't it? since a negative would only indicate a direction, thus a vector?

Electric potential - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_potential)
At a point in space, the electric potential is the potential energy per unit of charge that is associated with a static (time-invariant) electric field. It is a scalar quantity, typically measured in volts. The difference in electrical potential between two points is known as voltage.

There is also a generalized electric scalar potential that is used in electrodynamics when time-varying electromagnetic fields are present. This generalized electric potential cannot be simply interpreted as potential energy per unit charge, however.

Scalar should only be an absolute value of a calculation isn't it? If you add negative sign to the voltage measurement, it isn't voltage anymore.

And magnet have potential too isn't it, without it it wouldn't have work? So when the leedskalnin steel is detached there is magnetic potential which being converted to electric potential?

Magnetic field will create magnetic potential, but I am not sure how magnetic current usually called.

Potential without current or current without potential can not do work, since work is a multiplication of both. Lamp can not be lighted up without work. iron can not be attached to magnet without work. even if the source of work is not understood yet, to do work there must be potential and some amount of potential leak.

Maybe the potential is not coming from the coil or magnet or battery it self, but coming from environment. Maybe the environment is not temperature, wind or waterfall, something unimaginable but it would still need potential and it's leaking to do work.

Wether one has to rely to another, I stil learning.

sucahyo
03-18-2009, 05:35 AM
EDWARD'S THEORY OF MAGNETIC CURRENT (http://www.beinsa.info/index.php?option=com_jdownloads&Itemid=16&task=view.download&cid=4202)
Now I will tell you what magnetic current is. Magnetic current is the same as electric current is a wrong expression. Really it is not one current, they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams and the other is composed of South Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screw-like fashion, and with high speed. One current alone if it be North Pole magnet current or South Pole magnet
current it cannot run alone. To run one current will have to run against the other.

Rectified
03-18-2009, 08:08 AM
Raui

Thank you for your kind words. I do appreciate your understanding and attempt at mediation. I believe if the those greatest men of science were alive today, they would change and create very different laws with new terminology to apply to many different situations.
When I built my first Tesla coil more then 45 years ago I struggled for over a year at understand what Teslaís writings were saying compared to what teachers had taught me. I found many bad examples and misinterpretations being used by my instructors. It was only after going back and studying with an open mind, how important the specific terms such as Voltage, Amps, ohms, Coulomb, electromotive force ( EMF ), Etc. where intended to be applied, that I was able to understand. Through the years the terms above continue to be used inappropriately by many and cause a great deal of confusion. Iím hopping sometime later today I can find time to start a new thread as Aron suggested, I hope you will participate. The more points of view to help unwind the tangled web of terminology the better for all.
Taking time away from my lab is always or even to sleep is a constant struggle.

Best regards to all Rectified

Raui
03-18-2009, 10:10 AM
Rectified,
For sure, I will I'll be contributing where I can. At the moment I am in the process of building a grey tube and replicate Tesla's stout copper bars experiment (cleverly coined the 'Hairpin circuit' by Karl_Palsness of this Forum). It is harder for me to get materials required for things like this (due to income and accessibility) so my replications take time. When they are built they are a great learning tool for me though.

Sucahyo,
I learn new things everyday. Most of my learning has to be done from research of previously replicated material and try and put the puzzle together by putting together similarities. Thank you for that link. I have a new view on things. Much appreciated.

Aaron
03-18-2009, 06:34 PM
@Aaron, how can we call a difference in voltage positive or negative? it would always be positive shouldn't it? since a negative would only indicate a direction, thus a vector?

It goes beyond this - there can be two negatives on a circuit connected by a common positive and the difference between the negatives is a negative potential difference. They're not simply potential differences in relation to each other, the energy is different in the way it behaves and it can be captured and it is literally negative.

Aaron
03-18-2009, 06:47 PM
EDWARD'S THEORY OF MAGNETIC CURRENT (http://www.beinsa.info/index.php?option=com_jdownloads&Itemid=16&task=view.download&cid=4202)

I didn't look at your link but I saw your subject line. That is correct that the magnetic current is not the same as electron current. However, the magnetic current will still measure amperage on a meter and will perform work as evidenced by what the magnetic field is doing and there is no voltage, no ohm's law, no lenz's law and no faraday's law of induction.

sucahyo
03-19-2009, 02:00 AM
It goes beyond this - there can be two negatives on a circuit connected by a common positive and the difference between the negatives is a negative potential difference. They're not simply potential differences in relation to each other, the energy is different in the way it behaves and it can be captured and it is literally negative.I see. We have different opinion then. I still think the difference between negative to negative is still a positive value. Even if the second negative is in different dimension.

Or you only mention the negative voltage to spesific kind of non ordinary voltage?

However, the magnetic current will still measure amperage on a meter and will perform work as evidenced by what the magnetic field is doing and there is no voltage, no ohm's law, no lenz's law and no faraday's law of induction.I have different opinion. Work is not the same as current, even if work increase the same way as the current increase. To do work we need potential too. And I think you say no voltage because you can't measure it. The same way as Dr Robert Adam complain about device measurement using standard equipment where he insist of the use of only calorimeter to measure his.

Aaron
03-19-2009, 03:30 AM
Volts X Amps = Watts and 1 watt over 1 second is 1 joule of work...I already understand that and it only applies to conventional circuits with conventional current and voltage AND with time on the circuit flowing in the forward direction.

I say no voltage because there is no voltage...not because none was measured, but because there isn't any or it is negative. When I say there is no potential difference or a negative differential, that isn't a matter of semantics, it is what it is.

Positive voltage and a negative inductive spike for example...the properties of the energy are very different from each other. They charge batteries different, they light lights different, they charge caps different and they perform other functions in a different way.

Vortex
03-19-2009, 07:45 AM
EDWARD'S THEORY OF MAGNETIC CURRENT (http://www.beinsa.info/index.php?option=com_jdownloads&Itemid=16&task=view.download&cid=4202)

I know you spoke about Leedskalnins in the previous posts .. but
Sucahyo, you need to clarify by Name Dropping so we know who Edward is..
Nice find.:notworthy:

I was unaware that the Edward Leedskalnins of the Coral Castle had a
publication. (was news to me.. I don't watch the news :D any more)

Or that the "EDWARD'S THEORY OF MAGNETIC CURRENT" you gave a link to
was speaking about the Edward Leedskalnins.

sucahyo
03-19-2009, 09:06 AM
Yes, it is Edward Leedskalnin.

This is the content of the document:
EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN AN UNLIKELY HERO
EDWARD'S THEORY OF MAGNETIC CURRENT
EMERY'S REPLICATION OF EDWARD'S PERPETUAL MOTION HOLDER
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER A BASIC TPU
APPENDIX A The Original KeelyNet Posting of Edward Leedskalnin's 'Magnetic Current'
APPENDIX B A duplication of Edward Leedskalnins' - 'Perpetual Motion Holder' shared courtesy of Matthew S. Emery KeelyNet 06/05/02