of the electrodynamics of a magnet and conductor

Relativity

of the electrodynamics of a magnet and conductor

Posted by Jerry on February 19, 2022 at 10:28 pm

What of the electrodynamics of a magnet and conductor? What of the relative motion of them? Why does the electrical current appear when the magnet is in motion, while the conductor is “stationary”, yet doesn’t appear when the conductor is in motion, while the magnet is “stationary”? How would this effect work if these two devices were to interact, say, traveling at a constant velocity in a vehicle on earth? How would this experiment go if the car was a convertible? or if the vehicle was contained, or even “pressurized”?

If they were to travel at a constant velocity, couldn’t they artificially create the inertial conditions as if they were “stationary” elsewhere? Also, what of how the earth spins and revolves around the sun? How to account for which device is “stationary” and which one is “in motion” or “travels”? How is it possible to create an inertial reference frame that “travels”? What if the vehicle wasn’t on earth at all? How would the magnet and conductor act if set up within a spacecraft in outer space? And out of curiosity, how would the two devices act if they were both within a frame that accelerates?

How fast does a magnet have to go, to create the electric current with the conductor? How does the magnet and conductor seem to “know” their immediate surroundings? and their positioning relative to each other? of which is “in motion” or “stationary”? Could any of the “experimental set-ups” with alternate vehicles find different results?

Doesn’t electrodynamics play by different rules than kinematics?

Is it possible that Einstein may have applied too much electrodynamics knowledge, that wouldn’t work exactly well or at least as accurately as kinematics? He even named his famous paper “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies“. This we would eventually know as Special Relativity.

Here is the famous paper

https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

How exactly did Einstein arrive at the constancy of the velocity of light? Was the idea one of Maxwell’s equations? The concepts of time dilation and the maximum possible velocity seem required for the constancy of c to work. Also, the relativity of simultaneous events was thought of as a “consequence”, that is, instead of “proof” or adequate evidence. The distances that some events which were said to appear at different times, may instead, occur simultaneously from the standpoint of other observers, even at extremely short distances away.

It has been said that Maxwell’s equations show that, regardless of how fast or slow a given object, light source, or observer is said to go, that light travels at the constant velocity of 186,282 miles per second. It has also been said that Einstein arrived at the constancy of c by himself.

Also, how does a conductor and magnet work if experiencing a high level of gravity, or extreme acceleration? or if traveling at a constant velocity within zero-gravity? or each of them at different times? What exactly causes the electric field?

How does the process work without a “stationary” reference frame? Could this effect provide evidence for a stationary aether? What of how the earth spins, and orbits the sun, while the sun travels through the galaxy, and the galaxy throughout the universe? Could the position of the earth, or anything physical at all, be found within a stationary aether, even if the universe is actually somewhat “static” and doesn’t expand?

How exactly does electrodynamics correspond with the kinematics? 

Marco replied 6 months ago 3 Members · 13 Replies
13 Replies

Jerry

Organizer
February 19, 2022 at 10:29 pm
Sorry again for all the weird codes and such. Maybe some of this is possible to decipher. 🙂
- This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by Jerry.
Jerry

Organizer
February 19, 2022 at 11:00 pm
Also, it may have appeared as though I accept as valid, the ideas of time dilation, the maximum possible velocity, and the relativity of simultaneous events. I actually don’t though. I also don’t accept the ideas of length contraction and relativistic mass. The only part of Special Relativity I actually accept as truth, is the first postulate, which was Galileo’s original relativity from around a few centuries ago.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by Jerry.
Jan Olof

Member
April 27, 2022 at 2:41 pm

Hi!

I have not explicitly written about magnets inducing currents, but I have analyzed the very phenomenon induction thoroughly. Maybe you might benefit from my two papers on the subject:

2003 The Law of Electromagnetic Induction Proved to be False Using Classical Electrostatics

https://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_189.pdf

2014 The Claim that Neumann’s Induction Law Is Consistent with Ampère’s Law Rejected DOI: 10.7763/IJMO.2014.V4.394 (IJMO)

With best regards

Jan Olof Jonson
- Jerry
  
  Organizer
  April 30, 2022 at 3:07 am
  
  Hi Jan! Thanks for responding!
  
  I thought it was particularly fascinating how when there is an excess of charges at one of the magnetic poles, a deficit at the other, that that causes an electric current.
  
  I couldn’t find the answers to many of my particular questions. For instance, here was an observation and a question, “Why does the electrical current appear when the magnet is in motion, while the conductor is “stationary”, yet doesn’t appear when the conductor is in motion, while the magnet is “stationary”? How would this effect work if these two devices were to interact, say, traveling at a constant velocity in a vehicle on earth?”
  
  Also, “If they were to travel at a constant velocity, couldn’t they artificially create the inertial conditions as if they were “stationary” elsewhere? What of how the earth spins and revolves around the sun? How to account for which device is “stationary” and which one is “in motion”? How fast does a magnet have to go, to create the electric current with the conductor? How does the magnet and conductor seem to “know” their immediate surroundings? and their positioning relative to each other, and if within close proximity? of which is “in motion” or “stationary”?”
Jan Olof

Member
April 30, 2022 at 10:39 pm

Hi Jerry:

I must confess that I am not to the extent specialized on magnets that I can give you complete answers to all your questions.

Anyhow, I remember that Ampère writes that a magnet can be regarded as consisting of infinitely many microscopic circular currents, thus equalling a single electric current going through a circular conductor along the borders of a circularly shaped magnet *). Inside the magnet, all the magnetic effects of infinitesimally small currents close to a neighboring orbiting current cancel, except for the sum of those aligned to the circular border.

To conclude, a magnet causes the same effect as an electric current.

The law that I claim does induce an electric current, is ‘the so-called Continuity Equation of Electricity’, mentioned as Eq. (1) in my paper available on https://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_189.pdf

Apparently, there’s needed a changing time function of the electric field due to the magnet (or equivalent electric current) generating the electric field. Due to the inverse square law, if the position of the magnet (or the electric current, corresponding to a primary circuit) changes with time, this condition is fulfilled, and, accordingly, a current will be induced in the adjacent conductor).

*) Please see: Reference [4] in my recent paper available in http://researchopinion.in/index.php/jro/article/view/152/278

However, I am not able to define the exact position of this statement attributed by me to Ampère.

I look forwards to give you further answers to your questions, as far as my knowledge of the subject suffices.

With best regards
Jan Olof

Member
April 30, 2022 at 10:47 pm

Excuse me, Jerry, I omitted the comment to your question “Why does the electrical current appear when the magnet is in motion, while the conductor is “stationary”, yet doesn’t appear when the conductor is in motion, while the magnet is “stationary”?

-But
isn’t it so that in a generator, consisting of a rotating conductor a current
is generated due to the magnet which surrounds it?’ Here it follows:
Jan Olof

Member
May 11, 2022 at 1:32 pm

Hi, Jerry!

I found that it was almost impossible to read my recent reply on April 30, 2022 at 10:47 pm, due to intruding “computer system information”.

I therefore repeat the message (marginally edited) here:

“Excuse me, Jerry, I omitted the comment to your question “Why does the electrical current appear when magnet is in motion, while the conductor is “stationary”, yet doesn’t appear when the conductor is in motion, while the magnet is “stationary”?

-But

isn’t it so that in a generator, consisting of a rotating conductor a current

is generated due to the magnet surrounding it?’

I will return to your remaining questions, if I am able to give any relevant comments.

With best regards,

Jan Olof Jonson
Marco

Member
May 11, 2022 at 3:39 pm

I think this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_paradox can give you some inputs of explantion on similar problems.

Regards ___ Ing MM
Jan Olof

Member
May 23, 2022 at 10:27 pm

Thank you for your tip!

However, I do not believe in neither Maxwell nor Faraday, since I have succeeded in reducing electromagnetism to Coulomb’s Law, beginning with a paper in 1997, please see http://db.naturalphilosophy.org/member/?memberid=304&subpage=abstracts

(first paper published by CHINESE JOURNAL OF PHYSICS VOL. 35, NO. 2 APRIL 1997, pp. 139-149; to be requested by me, E-mail joj8088@bahnhof.se)
- Marco
  
  Member
  May 29, 2022 at 9:01 am
  
  Hallo Jan Olof,
  
  thank you for your reference I like it very much.
  
  I answered on your email too.
  
  Have a nice Sunday
  
  Ing___MM
- Marco
  
  Member
  July 9, 2022 at 5:27 pm
  
  Hallo @jajo8088 & @JoP and all
  
  I read your paper and I think it is right: magnetism derive from charge motion, but mathematics calculus is much complicated without using magnetic law.
  
  There are integrals made on retarded time, every variable we use must be writed with a long complex formula😥…🤯.
  
  For me is an important theorical concept but it is not practically usable.
  
  For doing a mathematical comparison “Magnetism laws” is like “Pitagora’s theorem” that are simply to use but PT isn’t a postulate, but is demonstrate mathematicly in hundreds of different modes.
  
  I think also, is possible to demonstrate that “retarded potential” is mathematecly equivalent with “static” aether theory because retard of time is caused by light travel thrugh medium.
  
  Best regards
  
  Ing. MM
  - Jan Olof
    
    Member
    November 22, 2022 at 6:41 pm
    
    Dear Marco:
    
    I will give short comments upon your statements within citation marks:
    
    “I read your paper and I think it is right: magnetism derive from charge motion, but mathematics calculus is much complicated without using magnetic law.”
    
    My comment: Coulomb’s Law is simple, but mathematics are complicated. I recall my own undergraduate studies. Just take a look at Abramowitz and Stegun HMF. Nonetheless it is an excellent means to prove physical relations.
    
    “There are integrals made on retarded time, every variable we use must be writed with a long complex formula….”
    
    My comment: Yes, indeed. If intending to solve an integral for six-seven variables, including time, it demands some tedious work. Furtheron, the definition of retarded time must be correct, too. In fact, the commonplace formulation like that in Feynman’s Lectures, appeared to be fallacious, please see my paper ‘Refutation of Feynman’s Derivation of the Lienard-Wiechert Potentials’, Journal of New Energy, Volume 7, No. 3, pp. 42-44 2003, 10th Natural Philosophy Alliance Conference, Storrs, CT, United States, https://www.naturalphilosophy.org/site/event/?eventid=22
    
    https://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_paperlink_1681.pdf
    
    “For me is an important theorical concept but it is not practically usable.”
    
    Well, I think that it will not cause any fundamental problem for those familiar with programming (not me!) to insert the correct formulae in a good mathematic program.
    
    With best regards
    
    Jan Olof Jonson
    
    CNPS member
    - Marco
      
      Member
      December 4, 2022 at 10:09 pm
      
      Hi Jan,
      
      thanks for your explaination.
      
      I think your work is an important theorical work, and I think it will be possible to apply it on computer simulation, but algebraically talking it will be difficult to leave magnetic theory.
      
      Best regards and good work
      
      Ing Marco M

Relativity

Organizer:

of the electrodynamics of a magnet and conductor

of the electrodynamics of a magnet and conductor