-
#120 by dustinthewind on 28 Feb, 2019 13:17
-
Great, now I have prove that you have no ability to focus on the problem and provide an experimental setup...That is it: you have no understanding of physics involved and you have no ability to construct a setup to prove that Lorentz force on electrons in a segment of wire moving with constant velocity trough uniform constant magnetic field creates EMF as it is pictured by MIT cource-ware 2018 which copy of is published in my paper:
You accuse me of not understanding the physics involved without responding to a single technical point I made, or acknowledging that you still have not provided an equation for your so-called force law that even has consistent units.
http://www.tyrell-innovations.com/share/OrmanForce.pdf
Until you show an experimental setup of your design or any other one you will be considered by me as a troll and I will not exchange any dialogs with you...
I have provided you with experimental setups. The textbook chapter you link to in your paper has a variety of experimental setups, none of which match the experiments you reported.
http://web.mit.edu/viz/EM/visualizations/coursenotes/modules/guide10.pdf
The online calculator you link to shows another example, directly related to what you ask for:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genwir3.html#c1
Just take that setup with 2 bar magnets lined up north to south with a gap. You can hook up a decent voltmeter to either end of the metal wire. Note that the loop formed by the wire and voltmeter will have some additional magnetic field passing through it (additional meaning besides the strongest part of the field which is in the gap between the magnets) so for best results, the leads should be kept away from the strongest part of the field near the magnets, and the leads should be kept as still as possible.
Because your setup will show voltage induced by varying magnetic field as the wire is moving along the gap...
And that is Faraday's induction and not Lorentz Motional EMF...
For 100 years now there is no experimental setup proving existence of Motional EMF of section of a conductor moving with constant linear velocity in uniform constant intensity magnetic field...
So, stop trolling nonsense!
There is experimental evidence of this. A homopolar motor with sliding contacts is a great example. A metal coated disk magnet rotates its metal through a constant magnetic field. The metal that rotates and experiences acceleration via rotation, rotates in a non-rotating magnetic field and experiences induction.
The metal that doesn't rotate in the magnetic field doesn't experience induction. It resides in the lab frame with the magnetic field. Because the two metals in the circuit see different realities - one sees an electric field and the return wire doesn't, a current is induced in the connecting wire measurable by a galvanometer.
All my and Barnett's experiment did was to attempt to determine that the magnetic field indeed doesn't rotate with the magnet axially.
The magnetic field is a superposition of all possible realities. It is actually a velocity dependent dipole electric field. This is why outside a solenoid the magnetic field drops off with distance cubed, and inside it is constant. Depending on your direction the dipole electric field rotates perpendicular to your direction. So the magnetic field lines are a velocity map of a dipole potential and another effect that is strange and causes a tilting of the electric fields in electrons when you approach/leave magnet. The strange tilting of electron fields also happens you approach a current carrying long wire.
All of this is induced by relativity and we wouldn't have a magnetic field if we didn't have relativity. This is why relativity is built into Maxwell's equations. The dipole is induced because a current loop has negative charges moving and positive charges that are not. You speed up time for the charges in a current loop that are moving with you and slow down time for charges in a current loop moving against your direction. A buffer effect builds up charge on the side where the charges are moving against your direction because of the larger relative velocity.
This is also why the magnetic field doesn't rotate because the magnetic field is some how associated with the vacuum which determines relativity velocity. The vacuum doesn't rotate except via the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lense%E2%80%93Thirring_precession which is the only time I think a magnetic field may actually rotate. This is why when you rotate you experience acceleration of your arms because your rotating relative to the vacuum. Even with an empty universe if there was a vacuum it would tell you that your rotating, strange as that is. -
#121 by MathewOrman on 28 Feb, 2019 14:38
-
The Faraday's homopolar generator only requires physical brushing and the rotation's relativity and or direction is irrelevant...
If magnet is in motion then its field i also in motion, but because rotation axis is aligned with axis of symmetry
all means of detection fail because at any radial point during rotation magnetic field has constant magnitude and orientation thus induction is zero thus zero EMF but Lorentz claimed otherwise...
-
#122 by dustinthewind on 28 Feb, 2019 16:05
-
The Faraday's homopolar generator only requires physical brushing and the rotation's relativity and or direction is irrelevant...
If magnet is in motion then its field i also in motion, but because rotation axis is aligned with axis of symmetry
all means of detection fail because at any radial point during rotation magnetic field has constant magnitude and orientation thus induction is zero thus zero EMF but Lorentz claimed otherwise...
If you like you can try it with a set of Helmholtz coils. Make a stationary circuit with a galvanometer inside the Helmholtz coils. Make a wire that slides down the two lengths of wire connected to the galvanometer. As you slide the wire back and forth there should be a current induced. The magnetic field inside the Helmholtz coils should be uniform. Again you need to have sliding contact to make only part of the circuit see the relativistic effects from the Helmholtz coils.
It should be the same as a homopolar motor just linearized instead of rotational.
I'm positive this experiment has been conducted by other's. -
#123 by MathewOrman on 28 Feb, 2019 17:03
-
Yes, but those setups produce AC EMF of Faraday's induction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=-CXsXeizmZw
You need to produce DC EMF as predicted by Lorentz Motional EMF...
Ones again: no brushing, Lorentz Motional EMF must produce DC EMF without brushing... -
#124 by meberbs on 28 Feb, 2019 17:17
-
Great, now I have prove that you have no ability to focus on the problem and provide an experimental setup...
No, but your statement is evidence of you distorting what I said, apparently because you don't want to admit that I gave you what you asked for.Because your setup will show voltage induced by varying magnetic field as the wire is moving along the gap...
False. The magnet is stationary, so the magnetic field is not changing. As described in more detail in dustinthewind's post, special relativity requires that whether you move the magnet or move the wire, you get the same current, since there is no special reference frame. As a result, it is not a coincidence that the prediction for the current is the same in either reference frame, they are different ways to represent the same thing, so your claim that only one of them works is self-contradictory.
And that is Faraday's induction and not Lorentz Motional EMF...
If you want more room to move the wire in a uniform field, instead of a square end for the bar magnets, you can have it be rectangular with the long side along the direction you are moving the wire. The magnetic field strength will not be constant at every point on the moving wire, but that is irrelevant, since the field experienced by any given piece of the wire would be unchanging. The gradient is necessary, since you want to get the leads to the voltmeter away from the magnetic field, so their motion is not significant.
As an alternative, you can actually look at that chapter that you linked to, and see on page 10-8 where they provide a diagram where a metal rod is sliding along 2 metal bars. Use a voltmeter as the resistor, and then all of your leads can be fixed in place, so the whole setup can be within a uniform field if you have a big enough coil.For 100 years now there is no experimental setup proving existence of Motional EMF of section of a conductor moving with constant linear velocity in uniform constant intensity magnetic field...
Untrue, you have been given multiple examples, from motion of electrons in free space, the experiment I just described and the video I linked showing a homopolar generator.So, stop trolling nonsense!
You are relatively new here, so you may not be aware that name-calling is not acceptable behavior here. As for nonsense: I have given evidence and supported my points, while you have yet to provide a single example of an experiment where the Lorentz force does not work. In all of your examples so far, what you have described is exactly what is predicted by Maxwell's equations and the Lorentz force, you have just made incorrect assertions about what the Lorentz force predicts.The Faraday's homopolar generator only requires physical brushing and the rotation's relativity and or direction is irrelevant...
Go look at the video I previously provided again. As I have pointed out before, the sign of the voltage changes depending on the direction the disk is spinning. If the voltage was due to friction (generating a static charge) between the brush and the plate, the sign change with direction of motion would not happen.If magnet is in motion then its field i also in motion, but because rotation axis is aligned with axis of symmetry
A spinning magnet produces the exact same field as a stationary magnet when the rotation is along the magnet's axis of symmetry. The Lorentz force equation* does not predict anything different to happen with the spinning magnet than with the stationary magnet, since the fields are the same. The current due to motion of a wire relative to the magnet is very real, though you have to setup the measurement apparatus correctly. You did not even deny that the setup I provided would work, you just claimed that the field was not constant despite the fact that the magnet is not moving.
all means of detection fail because at any radial point during rotation magnetic field has constant magnitude and orientation thus induction is zero thus zero EMF but Lorentz claimed otherwise...
Your arguments against the Lorentz force so far have all been strawmen, where the only thing wrong is that the Lorentz equation does not predict what you claim it does. (That and the fact that you have not provided an alternative proposal that so much as has consistent units.)
*you refer to Lorentz as if you are referring to the person, rather than the equation. If you want to refer to the person, please provide a sourced quote where he is describing the situation you are talking about.Yes, but those setups produce AC EMF of Faraday's induction:
It is AC in that video because the motion is back and forth. Again, I already provided a video where the output is DC, and the result is clearly not caused by the presence of the brush, because the sign changes with direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=-CXsXeizmZw
You need to produce DC EMF as predicted by Lorentz Motional EMF...
Ones again: no brushing, Lorentz Motional EMF must produce DC EMF without brushing...
You have not provided a description of a setup that can avoid the need for a brush or similar, since something must maintain contact between the moving and non-moving pieces. The only thing you provided was a patent where the applicant failed to account for the effect of the field on 2 of the 4 sides of their coils. (Again, you base your arguments on incorrect claims about what is actually predicted.) -
#125 by elektryx tech on 01 Mar, 2019 07:11
-
Yes, but those setups produce AC EMF of Faraday's induction:
OK, I think I see what you are getting at here. You want to produce a constant DC current (EMF) in a static circuit by moving a magnetic field. And due to the loop nature of a circuit this may not be possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=-CXsXeizmZw
You need to produce DC EMF as predicted by Lorentz Motional EMF...
Ones again: no brushing, Lorentz Motional EMF must produce DC EMF without brushing...
This does make for an interesting topology problem....
I can think of several examples where a DC current is produced in a localized area of a circuit, but it's always canceled by another opposing DC current in another part of the circuit. Your experiment with the toroid is a good example of this.
Another example of this would be dropping a magnet down a copper pipe, a DC current is produced below the magnet which creates a magnetic field pushing up on the magnet, but a negative DC current is produced above the magnet which pulls up on the magnet. (Both forces end up being in the same upward direction, but the total DC current for the whole pipe is zero.)
The one experiment I can think of that might show a dc value. Charging a capacitor with a single wire. (I finally see the point of your third experiment in your paper.) Some hints on attempting this, the capacitive plates are going to have to be far enough apart so none of your circuit reverses though the magnetic field. Maybe look into using spherical capacitors (Like on Van De Graph device) as these do not require an opposing plate to store charge. Not sure that it will be possible to measure the voltage differential on a voltmeter since much of the voltage will be drained very rapidly by measuring it.
Hope this helps.... -
#126 by dustinthewind on 01 Mar, 2019 13:32
-
An AC experiment you could do that tests the DC induction by V x B = E in a constant magnetic field. You just osculate the circuit at the resonant frequency. The capacitance with the voltage induces a current in the circuit which transfers to the non moving circuit.
-
#127 by MathewOrman on 01 Mar, 2019 18:19
-
Here is an apparent prove of Motional EMF an experiment created by a university:
-
#128 by elektryx tech on 01 Mar, 2019 19:12
-
Here is an apparent prove of Motional EMF an experiment created by a university:
Yep, that is exactly what you would expect to see.
Notice they get a positive voltage when the first part of the loop goes through the magnetic field and then a negative voltage when the second part goes through the magnetic field. The same thing is happening in your toroid experiment but you are exposing both sides of the loop to the magnetic field at the same time so they cancel. -
#129 by MathewOrman on 01 Mar, 2019 22:52
-
Yep, must be so...
-
#130 by MathewOrman on 21 Jul, 2019 21:53
-
Yep, must be so...
That was meant as a Joke...
You 'we missed the fact that when coil enters magnetic field there is a large jump in magnetic field intensity thus creating an induction EMF and not motional EMF... After coil enters uniform magnetic field there is no induction but EMF is present due to energy stored in an inductor. At the end coil leaves the field thus again big jump in magnetic field intensity but in opposite direction thus we have another pulse due to induction EMF...
IF the coil was connected with a resistor as a load then you would no see and DC component but only two pulses, one at the beginning and another at the end... -
#131 by MathewOrman on 26 Aug, 2019 21:33
-
An AC experiment you could do that tests the DC induction by V x B = E in a constant magnetic field. You just osculate the circuit at the resonant frequency. The capacitance with the voltage induces a current in the circuit which transfers to the non moving circuit.
But V pertains to constant velocity... -
#132 by meberbs on 26 Aug, 2019 21:57
-
So you are just going to deny reality and ignore the results of the experiment? Even if your explanation made any sense, you simply fail to address the proportionality with velocity that was demonstrated.Yep, must be so...
That was meant as a Joke...
You 'we missed the fact that when coil enters magnetic field there is a large jump in magnetic field intensity thus creating an induction EMF and not motional EMF... After coil enters uniform magnetic field there is no induction but EMF is present due to energy stored in an inductor. At the end coil leaves the field thus again big jump in magnetic field intensity but in opposite direction thus we have another pulse due to induction EMF...
IF the coil was connected with a resistor as a load then you would no see and DC component but only two pulses, one at the beginning and another at the end... -
#133 by MathewOrman on 27 Aug, 2019 15:22
-
So you are just going to deny reality and ignore the results of the experiment? Even if your explanation made any sense, you simply fail to address the proportionality with velocity that was demonstrated.Yep, must be so...
That was meant as a Joke...
You 'we missed the fact that when coil enters magnetic field there is a large jump in magnetic field intensity thus creating an induction EMF and not motional EMF... After coil enters uniform magnetic field there is no induction but EMF is present due to energy stored in an inductor. At the end coil leaves the field thus again big jump in magnetic field intensity but in opposite direction thus we have another pulse due to induction EMF...
IF the coil was connected with a resistor as a load then you would no see and DC component but only two pulses, one at the beginning and another at the end...
As usual you are twisting facts... Bu I've made one last experiment showing a coil moving through constant magnetic field with constant velocity and I will publish it tonight...
:-) -
#134 by MathewOrman on 27 Aug, 2019 17:58
-
Here it is: Orman Force Law experimental setup of EMF due to charge acceleration in uniform magnetic field: The oscilloscope was set in single shot mode and coil motion was induced by hand... As indicated on the scope there was zero EMF due to linear motion and a large EMF due to acceleration at collision with stop bumper thus with agreement with Orman Force Law and invalidation of Lorentz Force and Law... :-)
-
#135 by MathewOrman on 27 Aug, 2019 18:01
-
The magnetic strip was magnetized across its thickness (axially) and inductance of the rectangular coil was 39 mH... :-)
-
#136 by meberbs on 27 Aug, 2019 19:07
-
As usual you are twisting facts...
False. I have not done that.
As to your experiment, it appears that that you taped a magnet to a coil. There are 2 main problems with that, and as usual it boils down to your experiment perfect validating the predictions of standard electromagnetism, but you incorrectly understanding what those predictions are.
First: You have the whole coil in the magnetic field in basically the same direction, so as has been explained to you before, the expectation is no voltage change, because the opposite sides of the coil cancel out.
Second: Your magnet is moving, and a moving source of magnetic field generates an electric field in the lab frame. This electric field is basically equal to - v x B, and therefore exactly cancels out the force from the magnetic field on the moving wire.
Special relativity requires that physics makes the same predictions for what happens in any inertial reference frame. In a rest frame a magnet stationary relative to a wire introduces no force on the charges in the wire. In a frame where they are both moving, the same prediction must be made. Electromagnetism is inherently consistent with special relativity, this happens because the fields transform between reference frames. The electromagnetic fields are described differently in different frames, which allows the actual results for whether charges experience a force to remain the same.
Also, it is logically impossible for any experiment to validate your so-called "Orman force law" because your units are inconsistent. -
#137 by MathewOrman on 27 Aug, 2019 19:55
-
As usual you are twisting facts...
False. I have not done that.
As to your experiment, it appears that that you taped a magnet to a coil. There are 2 main problems with that, and as usual it boils down to your experiment perfect validating the predictions of standard electromagnetism, but you incorrectly understanding what those predictions are.
First: You have the whole coil in the magnetic field in basically the same direction, so as has been explained to you before, the expectation is no voltage change, because the opposite sides of the coil cancel out.
Second: Your magnet is moving, and a moving source of magnetic field generates an electric field in the lab frame. This electric field is basically equal to - v x B, and therefore exactly cancels out the force from the magnetic field on the moving wire.
Special relativity requires that physics makes the same predictions for what happens in any inertial reference frame. In a rest frame a magnet stationary relative to a wire introduces no force on the charges in the wire. In a frame where they are both moving, the same prediction must be made. Electromagnetism is inherently consistent with special relativity, this happens because the fields transform between reference frames. The electromagnetic fields are described differently in different frames, which allows the actual results for whether charges experience a force to remain the same.
Also, it is logically impossible for any experiment to validate your so-called "Orman force law" because your units are inconsistent.
I think that children from a second grade school would understated this experiment but you don't...
And you twisting again... The magnetic strip is 1m long and coil slides on plastic sledge until it hits the plastic stop bumper and then we get EMF due to acceleration as seen on the scope but you missed that too... :-)
-
#138 by MathewOrman on 27 Aug, 2019 20:02
-
Also, it is logically impossible for any experiment to validate your so-called "Orman force law" because your units are inconsistent.
The units are: Force in Newtons, Charge in Coulombs, Velocity in m/sec and time in sec... :-) Matlab simulation included... :-) -
#139 by meberbs on 27 Aug, 2019 20:16
-
I think that children from a second grade school would understated this experiment but you don't...
One warning: personal insults get posts deleted on this site, I shouldn't even be replying to you, as my post will just be deleted too if a mod comes by.
And you twisting again... The magnetic strip is 1m long and coil glides on plastic sledge until it hits the plastic stop bumper and then we get EMF due to acceleration as seen on the scope but you missed that too... :-)
Anyway, you failed to label anything in your photos. The track just looks like a metal sheet. The block that was next to the coil seemed like the most magnet looking thing to me. Anyway with the magnet being that sheet on the track, you simply need to see point #1 from my previous post. The effects from opposite ends of the loop cancel out. This has been explained to you repeatedly.
Here is a post where you atttached your paper.Also, it is logically impossible for any experiment to validate your so-called "Orman force law" because your units are inconsistent.
The units are: Force in Newtons, Charge in Coulombs, Velocity in m/sec and time in sec... :-) Matlab simulation included... :-)
You have 2 different equations. I am replacing the deltas with d's since that makes the notation more meaningful anyway:
F = q*(dv/dt)*B, which is wrong because the right side of the equation has units of force per time, while the left side has units of force.
F = q*dB/dt has units of force times distance on the right side.
Neither equation is consistent, and there isn't even a made up unit to replace proper units for magnetic field that could make both equations work at the same time.
Also, you failed to attach a Matlab simulation.