Re: is the magnetic field really moving?

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Salmon Egg wrote:

> In article <Pine.LNX.4.50.0808280830560.14931-100000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  Timo Nieminen <timo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > B = mu0 M
> > 
> > in the (instantaneous) rest frame of the magnetised material. In the 
> > rotating frame, M is the same as in the laboratory frame when the
magnet 
> > is at rest. Therefore, in the rotating frame, we have the same B field

> > that we have in the laboratory frame when the magnet is stationary.
> 
> You are making things too complicated. The transformation of B into E is

> pro****tional to v/c. Most relativistic effects, the ones that confuse 
> people like dilation of time, are pro****tional to (v/c)^2. Except for 
> the motional emf, relativistic effects at the speeds I am considering 
> will be absent.

And since the only relativistic effect I was considering (in method A) was

the relativistic transormation of B into E (I wouldn't call it "motional 
emf" - that's likely to be misleading), why do you say I'm making things 
too complicated?

-- 
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
E-prints: http://eprint.uq.edu.au/view/person/Nieminen,_Timo_A..html
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html