Re: is the magnetic field really moving?

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:08:59 -0700 Salmon Egg <SalmonEgg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

| In article <g6ana402oca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, phil-news-nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
| wrote:
| 
|> Is the magnetic field really moving if the magnets move but the field
remains
|> the same?
| 
| No! How would you go about checking for motion?

How about a variation of Faraday's Homopolar Generator ... the one with a
big
round magnet above the disk, and another below the disk, where the magnets
rotate with the disk?

The flaw in Faraday's design is that the connection loop between the axle
and
the edge brushes is within the "extraneous" field.  This loop is
stationary
but in a field sourced from rotating magnets.  This experiment is
ambiguous
because it can be explained in terms of a rotating field inducing
potential
in the "extraneous" connections.

So what is needed is to eliminate the effect of the extraneous connections
in
an extraneous field, by eliminating those connections altogether.  I
suggested
a model for such a thing in another post, but I don't know if anyone
really
understood it.  So what I will do here is explain something simpler.

The problem is that to measure the potential, we have to form a circuit,
which
will be a loop in the field.  While all of that loop will be within the
same
field, it won't all have the same motion relative to the expected
potential.

Imagine a loop of wire (with some on board means to detect current in that
loop at some small point in the loop).  You draw an arrow around the loop
to
show an expected current direction.  Part of the loop is moving in on
direction
relative to that arrow and field, and part is moving in the opposite
direction
relative to that arrow.  We can see that if there is going to be a
potential
produced, half the loop will produce it in one direction, and half in the
other direction.  The two potentials will buck each other and no net
current
can be detected.

The simplified design I suggest is this.  There are 2 spokes going outward
from
the axle to the edge of the disk at 180 degree opposite directions.  There
is a
circular rim all the way around the disk.  The 2 spokes connect to each
other
at the axle.  They both also connect to the rim.  The spokes and rim are
metal
to be conductive (for example, copper wire).  The rest of the disk will be
some
non-conductive material (for example a round piece of plastic).

With a single uniform magnet, the 2 spokes will have a bucking potential. 
So
instead of that, we have split magnets shaped as half circles.  On half of
the
disk, we arrange the magnets so the field direction is reversed relative
to
the other half.  The spoke conductors are aligned to be in the middle of
each
of the magnets.  There are 2 magnets on one side of the disk, one with N
facing
the disk, and the other with S facing the disk.  On the other side of the
disk
there are 2 more magnets, one with S facing the N magnet from the first
side,
and one with N facing the S magnet from the first side.  With the reversed
field on one of the spokes, its potential should boost the other spoke
instead
of buck against it.

The rim should not have a potential along its running length since the
motion
of the rim is along the length, not at 90 degrees from it.

-- 
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked.  Due to
ignorance |
|         by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked.  If you post
to  |
|         Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP.    
   |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at
ipal.net) |