Re: Induction: Aetherists lend me a hand!

On Aug 8, 1:40=A0pm, blackhead <larryhar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> > We know that the relation****p between the source current and induced
> > current is causal, but the source current ALSO causes B and A though
> > neither are causal to E. =A0Hence, the question that needs to be
> > modeled, is what kind of "aether stress" would produce this induction?
> > If it is not B nor A then what kind of "model" can we imagine that
> > would produce the parallel electrokinetic E field that generates
> > induction? What kind of "stress" in the Aether can we imagine that
> > does this?
>
> > Anyone?

> Benj, I think you have failed to mention one extremely im****tant
> point: The direction of the induced EMF at a point caused by the
> changing current in the current element depends upon where the rest of
> the closed path is taken!
>
> Similarly, if you have a test charge, the induced EMF acting upon it
> depends upon the direction the charge is moving in. Or if you have a
> static B, the force acting on the charge is always normal to the
> direction it's moving in. Which begs the question: How can a changing
> current produce an E or a static current produce a B that "knows"
> which direction the test charge is moving in to consistently apply a
> force in a direction related to the direction the charge is moving in?

You are obviously correct and one "answer" is that the E produced from
a changing current element is NOT the usual electrostatic E as is
commonly assumed. The properties are quite different and it has been
termed variously "E induction" or "Electrokinetic E" to point out the
differences.

For everyone else: We are talking here about placing a charge on on
pole of an electromagnet that is increasing (or decreasing) in field.
The charge will experience a force that drives it in a circle. BUT the
direction and location of the circle depend upon the initial velocity
of the charge! There is NOT a single E field in a single direction!

> I think the answer is simply that the E field of the test charge acts
> upon the charges that make up the current element which likewise
> creates a retarded E field that acts back upon the test charge which
> acts back upon the current element etc etc.

Possibly. I'd have to think about it.

> Electromagnetism as taught in textbooks seem to miss out the
> complicated feedback relation****p that exists between charges as the
> source of electromagnetism and the reacting charges.

Now this is very, very true. Nobody in EM seems to "get" what feedback
relation****ps mean. One of the most salient examples is the
calculation of the self-inductance of a straight wire. Everybody has a
cow over the fact that the mutual inductance equation has an R in the
denominator that goes to zero as the separation between the source
current and the induced current goes to zero. It "blows up" they all
cry! But does it really? No. The key is that as you reduce the
distance between the source and induced elements the mutual coupling
gets larger and by doing so the mutual inductance reflects emf BACK
upon the driving source reducing the source current and finally
driving it to zero! These feedback kinds of relation****ps just fly
right over the heads of people used to straight linear math. It's a
whole area of calculation that has been TOTALLY ignored!