|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
| Re: Diff between Electric & Magnetic Field |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: AndroclesAndrocles Date: May 6, 2008 15:43
"hanson" quick.net> wrote in message
news:P53Uj.7140$zw.5622@trnddc04...
| "Rock Brentwood" aka Mark Hopkins yahoo.com>
| wrote in message
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/2234efb13bae45a9
| >
| "hanson" quick.net> wrote in message
| news:QzQTj.37306$Bb3.24303@trnddc01...
| Marki, your lenghty tripe is certainly entertaining and belletristic.
| But how about an answer to Sanny's question:
| "Magnetic Field [is caused] by XXXXX?
| >
| "Androcles" wrote in message
| news:27VTj.10001$8q4.9216@newsfe15.ams2...
| Poor young Insanny wants answers that don't exist, or if they do
| nobody has yet found and published them.
| To be sure a magnetic field is created in a solenoid, the conductor
| of which is attached to the poles of a voltaic cell, [1] but the
| magnetic field of lodestone exists [1] without electrical stimulation
| which in the former case doesn't last indefinitely and the latter
| case does.
| If the question can be answered at all it is far more profound one
| than most people realise. [3]
| The electrical field of the charged particle is caused by YYYYY?
| The gravitational field of mass is caused by ZZZZZ?
| >
| hanson wrote:
| So, in the solenoid [1] it's the electric current, its moving electric
| charges that cause the magnetic field,
| (which in a way, IIRC, is used to define the SI Ampere unit,
| providing that the defining force is of magnetic nature.)
| And in the lodestone [2] it's the in place, non-moving, "aligned"
| electric charges, in their (Weiss) domains, that cause the
| magnetic field.
| >
| If these magnetic fields from [1] and [2] do have the same
| properties then one can say, that this situation here is one of
| the many possible starting points for [3] and here is a chance
| for someone to come up with a wonderful new story that can
| eventually be called a "theory" that answers Sanny's question.
| >
| ... Go for it, Andro!... .. or anybody else for that matter, who is
| deeply interested in the fundamentals of physics and who is
| more than just a parrot who regurgitates what is written in text
| books. Have at it!... ahahaha... ... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
| >
| PS:
| Andro, wait with your response for a day or so, to give
| someone else a chance to post their own takes.
| Chances are slim though for someone else to step up to
| the platter with some original thought... just like in most of
| your other previous challenges where there were no takers,
| except for fuming retorts by aggrieved Einstein Dingleberries
| who cursed you in their sorry state or ignorance... ahahaha...
| >
Ok, well, my response won't matter anyway since I don't have any
theories to offer. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (who lived in my neck of
the woods, same county, along with Charles Dickens) placed these
words in the mouth of his gumshoe character, Sherlock Holmes:
...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains,
however improbable, must be the truth.
All I do is present the facts and eliminate the impossible.
The facts are that action at a distance is indeed a fact, however
puzzling it may have been to one of the greatest scientific minds
in all history, Sir Isaac Newton, and I certainly cannot class myself
in his league. As far as these GEM [*] forces go, all anyone has
ever succeeded in doing is quantifying them. What makes them
tick is something that will probably remain a mystery for eternity.
Accept it as a fact and use it as a postulate. Maybe something useful
will come out of it, we are currently exploring superfluidity and
superconductivity and seeing some strange phenomena. As an
engineer I want superconductors for all manner of applications
but I want them at temperatures I can cope with, not -273 celcius.
There are Peltier junctions to explore ... science and technology
go hand in glove, each supports the other. HST is technology
that enables to the furtherance of astronomy. An electron
microscope enables the furtherance of biology. Each needs
the other for its advancement. Exploring Mars without rapid
communication with the home planet is a risky business, the
light accelerator would be a useful tool. So why no investment
when billions are spent on Large "Hardon" Colliders?
Answer: Because that prat Einstein still has influence.
Give me those billions and I'll produce two-way communication
with Mars in under a minute. Why haven't I patented the light
accelerator?
Answer: It's not worth my time and trouble busting a gut
for no reward, just for the benefit of others. I won't live long
enough to see a man land on Mars anyway.
[*]GEM - Gravitational, Electrostatic, Magnetic.
Science is the observation, investigation and explanation of
natural phenomena. It is not the creation of theories as some
here choose to believe, and I simply don't have an answer to
GEM. I can only do a Phuckwit Duck and say what it is not,
I cannot say what it is.
If you've ever seen Baez's crackpot index (which is mildly amusing),
Einstein scores 99. The fact that Baez sets Einstein as the standard
is the most amusing of it all.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?
Totalling Einstein's score:
1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false. Score 1
3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent. Score 4
5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful
correction. Score 9
5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a
widely accepted real experiment. Score 14
10 points for pointing out that you (Einstein) have gone to school, as if
this were
evidence of sanity.
Score 24
10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself (Einstein) to Einstein,
Score 34
20 points for each claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided
Score 54
20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if they were
fact.
'Really, this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some people
who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It is only
another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between Time and any
of the three dimensions of Space except that our consciousness moves along
with it.' -- Herbert George Wells - "The Time Machine" - 1895.
Score 74
30 points for suggesting that Einstein, in his later years, was groping his
way towards the ideas you (Einstein) now advocate.
Score 104
Less 5 given at the start, total is 99 for Einstein.
The score for Baez requires the Richter scale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
