On May 13, 3:13*pm, wrote:
On 13 mai, 02:36, "Y.y.Porat" wrote:
On May 12, 7:28 pm, wrote:
On 12 mai, 10:22, "Y.Porat" wrote:
On May 12, 3:15 pm, wrote:
On 12 mai, 04:10, PCB wrote:
On May 11, 10:46 pm, wrote:
On 11 mai, 12:36, PCB wrote:
On May 11, 6:02 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
PCB wrote:
I read somewhere that only electric currents generate magnetic fields.
That is incorrect. The intrinsic spins of elementary particles also
produce magnetic fields.
Where is the electric current in a permanent magnet?
There is none.
Is a permanent magnet a frozen electric current *in matter?
No.
It seems that the electric current in a magnet would like to flow, but
it cant.
No. Iron is conductive, as are most other permanent magnets.
The bulk magnetization of a permanent magnet is due to the alignment of
spins in the constituent atoms. This cannot be understood classically,
QM is required.
Tom Roberts
But sir, QM is false, never makes accurate predictions.
QM only probably will make a prediction, but probably not. I learned
that if a theory does not always make a predicted prediction, always,
than that theory is false, or at best useless.
So the question still remains untouched, and I have a permanent magnet
which is not a conductor at all.
No electrical conduction is required. Ceramic magnets for example
are not conductive.
Yes, thanks
You will find all the particular of what interests you here in the
CRC handbook of Chemistry & Physics, p 12-117
* electrons that are partially free to rotate locally.
*detectable
field that we can use.
This has been understood for more than 80 years, even though
QM trained physicists tend not to learn about it since this
observed fact is in contradiction with QM.
I do appreciate your answer.
This is what a high resolution surface scanner shows. I saw this
many times.
* *.
André Michaud
Thanks
André Michaud- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--------------
your explaantion about our scanners viewing sphers
is right it is not a comprehensive picture
actually very decieving
2
now what is for you *a * *'magnetic field'??
is it all clear to you ??
I do have a clear picture of how it resolves in
the 3-spaces model, yes.
what lighes behind the abstarct words ??
I don't know if you can make heads or tail of the
math involved, but here is an equation describing
the internal dynamic fields structure of an electron
in the 3-spaces model and also one describing the
internal dynamic fields structure of the de Broglie
photon.
------------------
French scientists ineed contributed a lot for advance of science
it was mainly because of the mind revolution of free speach
and thinking !!
now De Broglie
lived 100 years a go
he caould not know what we know today
At least, he really understood Maxwell's theory. And
besides, he lived untill 1985. He knew just about
all we know today.
i peersonally dont accept his
'wave around the nuc' concept
the electrons do not create field areond it
unless the whole Atom is revolving like say
a hydrogen gass that obviously does not stand still
according to myunderstanding based on some findings
th eelectron in the Atom is sending sort of 'Arms'streched
outwards in certian directions (if you like sort of
radially and not tangentally to the nuc )
-----------
http://pages.videotron.com/ceber/moving_electron.jpg
i will look for it later
-----
dont you think that if an electron can create
a 'megnetic field arrund it is it not a profe
that the eelctron is not a 'solid * undivisible '
unsubdivided particle ??
It seems to me that an electron does not "create"
a magnetic field around itself.
so what and how itis created *BY THE ELECTRON ??!!
Look at the equations I gave you. They explain it.
waht is it s'raw material for doing it if the
electron is an indivisible entity ??
Energy. Plain and simple
maybe this extract will explain a little more
for you, but I doubt it. I have tried in the
past to explain this to you.
http://pages.videotron.com/ceber/decoupling_orbit.jpg
----------
------
*It simply is "made
up of" both an electric field and a magnetic field
but that is exactly the question:
what are those fileld bhind those abstract words!!
They are a mathematical representation of the dynamic
nature of the energy that makes up the substance of
the electron.
what are they made of
are they made of 'pjhtons how and why are they move
as they do and not otherwise * *etc
Yes. They are made up of the same substance as
photons. The equations I gave you describe both,
but I don't think you will understand the math.
i hope you remember my Circlon' idea .....
----------------
since it is electromagnetic in nature.
???????
The fundamental energy is electromagnetic in nature.
See Maxwell's theory.
----------
Electrons have charge AND spin. They have both by
nature.
so waht is charge
Nobody knows what charge is.
and how and by waht means they word as they do
dont you think that 'modern physics' just take
some assumptions as for granted without *getting
into it deeper ??
Modern physics these days is the Copenhagen interpretation,
which means that it has made no progress since the 1930's
about the foundation.
while that attitude prevents firther advance !!
(as a pupil of the French education and spirit
i think you should not be happy about the existing situation!
I am not a pupil of any French education and spirit.
I study the foundation. That's all.
actually i noticed that you are as well 'plaged' with some
nonconformism !!......)
------------
(by spreading soemthing of *itself* around himself ??)
*in short Andre
just try and think how is it thatthe electron
can spread fields (that are certinly not mind ans spirit)
around itself
It doesn't "spread fields around itself" as you say.
It is these fields.
it is a serious question not a joke .....
serious and obviously not properly solved !!
and leaving it unsolved or delusivly solved
prevents advance of science!!
As long as you believe it is not solved, you are
unlikely to try to understand the answers offered
you.
André Michaud- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------
Mr Andre
just above you admit that no one really understand
what is an electric of magnetic field
and it is only some mathematical representation of it!!
on the other hand you pose to reach me
what they are by methematical formulas
that in manty cases lead to 'findings of
W and Z bosons !!!!
you cant old the string on both its edges
now instead that you willteach me
i will teach you ::
suplying some mathematical presentations
of a physical phenonene is not a completer
understanding of it
let me lend you a methapho
our situation about it is as the fire stoty:
people knew how to use fire thousands of years ago
BUT THEY DIDNT KNOW WAHT IT IS AND GOOD ENOUGH WHAT ARE THE DEEPER
PROCESSES
OF IT
it was only after the deaper understanding
of the chemical process and partners that take place in it
that
listen carefully
IT WAS ONLTY THEN THAT THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE COULD BE
INVENTED!!
got it pompy ??
got the meaning of deaper understanding !!
including the practical meaning ??
so dont pose that patronizing pose of youself
and start to be more humble about physics understandings
because you can still get
some physics lessons form me as well
about say
nuclear and Atomic structure !!!!!!!!!!
and the outcome of that knowlwdge !!
i hope that both of us undesrand what i mean .....
2
you didnt answer if you understood my
'Circlon' idea !!
3
again you admitted that no one really understand what is a field !!
soplease dont forget your statement about it !!
and dont foerget waht are the conclutions of that
admittance
(just if you ddint understand the conclutions:
if that is the situation it must be first
a
be asserted again and again (mainly foer the young generation)
in order of looking for better understanding
and no t to stay ion the smugg idiotic situation
b
make more efforts for better and deeper undertanding!!
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------