Hi Sue,

Have a look at my web page on http://www.newelectricity.co.uk and there is
those formulas there.

Chris.

"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...

The Real Chris top-posted:
Rubbish quantum mechanics it true at all energies. The energy of each of
the
quanta are hf where f is the frequency of the exciter and the number of
quanta per cycle is the energy per cycle divided by hf. Nothing special
about low energies.

and wrote earlier:
The model of the magnetic effect of current is in reality the
Lorenz contraction of the moving electrons relative to the
fixed charges in the wire and the electrostatic force is
mediated by virtual photons.

Is there some way you can relate this Lorenz contraction
to the velocity of a electon in a conductor or electron beam?
I have seen a formula for that somewhere.

The photon energy you cite would depend on atomic
emission and absorbtion would it not? So we could
perhaps turn off the lights and watch the magnetism being formed.

Sue...







"Sue..." wrote in message
ups.com...

The Real Chris wrote:

The inductive effect is in reality caused by the acceleration of
electrons.
Now these little charged particles are governed by quantum mechanics
and
the
energy states up the ladder are discontinuous and the electrons jump
from
one state to the next the two states overlap and during the transition
a
fluctuation occurs and a photon emission occurs, just like the
hydrogen
spectrum.

Look at Smith-Purcell radiation and see if your charges aren't moving
waaaay too slow for the effect you are assuming.

Sue...

The Real Chris wrote:
Hi Sue,

Have a look at my web page on http://www.newelectricity.co.uk and there is
those formulas there.

So what velocity do I put in the formula?

Sue...

Bill Snyder wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:48:10 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 06:38:42 GMT, "The Real Chris"
Gave us:

The magnetic field does not exist it is fictitious.

You're a ****ing retard, and the only thing that doesn't exist with
you is credibility.

You seem to have misspelled "delusional paranoid schizophrenic" as
"****ing retard." If you'll check out this poor loon's ravings over
on sci.physics.fusion, where he has a track record, you'll find that
he's a genius who in earlier days single-handedly built everything
from cold-fusion power generators to thermonuclear warheads. (But of
course that was before the Powers That Be revoked his security
clearance and had him lobotomized to shut him up.)

A short sample, of recent vintage:

The hydrogen engine was developed in Britain 30 years ago and is used on all
British Warships as is cold fusion lighting. At the moment the domestic
power units are reserved for the privilidged few as are the automobiles.

I get the cold fear that the British leadership is conserving this secret in
order to use them to re-esablish the British Empire and enforce their warped
view of the capitalist system.

The secret is perfectly safe as no one will believe me.

I believe they are also developing teleportation and matter creation units.

It might be quite nice to be British when they eventually get into use as a
dometic market item, like the domestic robot. These days we have criminals
availbable as domestic mindless pets mindlessly obeying orders in an
intelligent manner.

You can even hire them out as pretty sexy dancers and you take the money,
they only get sex and chocklates. One I know earns £10,000 a month for her
owner who keeps her on a lead as she is to stupid to understand where to go
and skips off like a child if not carefully looked after. I don't think she
knows who she was or what money is, but she has plenty of jewelry wrapped
round her beautiful slim body and really that is all their is.

She was a doctor of philophy once.... Now and nude dancing monkey! How much
I asked?

This guy's so far around the bend that he can't even see the curve
from where he is.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]

The part with the misspelling is exceptional. I have not laughed so
hard in a long time. Thank you! Five stars!

The Real Chris wrote:

Hi Sue,

Have a look at my web page on http://www.newelectricity.co.uk and there is
those formulas there.

Dude, I think you finally ****ed all the electrons off. They're not
delivering this page:

http://www.chrisspages.pwp.blueyonde...city/index.htm

I just get a 404 error.

--
Paul Hovnanian
------------------------------------------------------------------
If everything is coming your way then you're in the wrong lane.

The Real Chris wrote:

On this page:

http://www.chrisspages.pwp.blueyonde...ransformer.htm

You say: "Another improvement is a copper screen round the outer winding
and another one round the inner winding to act as a screen against
photons escaping thus reducing losses still further."

Have you actually built this thing? That copper screen will form what we
in the EE biz call "a shorted turn".

--
Paul Hovnanian
------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions stated herein are the sole property of the author. Standard
disclaimers apply. Celebrity voice impersonated. Batteries not included.
Limit one to a customer. Best if used by April 1, 2006. Refrigerate
after opening. Void if removed.

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
oups.com...
Chris
I get the sense you think my reply was sarcastic,
well it wasn't, I'll provide an example...
In the past, in North America, A/C was wired at
25 cycles, then a decision was made to transmit
power at 60 cycles. Subsequently, the size of the
transformers reduced (I recall by volume & weight)
in proportion to 25/60 creating great $savings.
That itself renders the idea that power transmutation
is proportional to frequency and is thus quantized,
as Planck's QT predicts. I can follow with many
details, but basically those facts are in accord with
your thesis.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
[snip weird ****]
...
Chris

Sounds good to me, I think a transformer
is basically a "quantum mechanical" device,
if it's examined in detail. I think your ideas
are very reasonable and advanced.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker


What nonsense. Increase frequency, reduce core flux for a given voltage and
number of turns , so make a smaller core at the original flux density.
Nothing to do with Chris's rubbish. Much to do with Faraday.

--

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer
----------------------------

Hello ppl,
I does written something about why a series of loop is not equal to
a loop mutiplied here. Maybe it is helpful.
Core Magnification of Magnetic field as a Parallel Path Phenomena
By Euler Cheung
06/03/2006
One of the mysterious phenomena in the electromagnet is that the iron
core
amplification of the surrounding Magnetic field from the coil. There
has been many
attempts to explain it in terms of electromagnetism theories. This is
the one I believe
to be most complete in explaining this phenomena.
First, for the sake of simplicity, we can consider the iron core in an
electromagnet
coil as made of many concentric metallic cylinders. And when the
electromagnet coil
is flowing with electrical current, each of the section of the coil
would act as the
center of many concentric Magnetic flux lines. Due to the geometry of
the
electromagnet coil and the property of Magnetic flux lines, these
concentric Magnetic
flux lines mutually annihilate each other in the gaps inside the coil.
It thus form many
layers of elliptic Magnetic flux lines (sharing the identical
focus)surrounding the wire.
Since the iron core is close by the wire and made of high Magnetic
permeable
material, these flux lines are thus draw into the core. And each
individual 'layers' of
the core has taken a finite number of Magnetic flux lines. Or, in other
words, the
'layers' of iron core has become a gigantic structure full of Magnetic
pathways. We
could thus envision that each 'layer' of the iron core is filled with
Magnetic flux lines
generated by the wire. From the perspective of each layer, there are
many flux lines
passing through it in parallel(each group of them has the same distance
from the
center.) And due to the timing of the electricity, some flux lines are
formed later than
the other. Those flux lines formed later couple with the existing flux
line to produce a
flux lines of much greater strength than the linear sum of them. Since
there is no
separation of layers in reality, we would expect the totality of
strength of Magnetic
flux is equal to the square of strength of each of them. The result is
a much greater
output of Magnetic flux emitted from the iron core. The center of the
iron core doesn't
contain any Magnetic flux lines since flux lines coming from opposite
direction
cancel out each other.

The Real Chris wrote:
If you make a single loop of wire bent into a circle and pass a regulated 1
amp current through it you will make a "magnetic field". According to Gauss
you have to imagine it is there and calculate accordingly. Then comes an
extraordinary performance of human intellect beginning with the magnetic
shells construction that shows that the field is uniform across the plane of
the loop.

According to Carl Popper we should now measure it to see.

Using a compass as a tangent galvanometer with the earth's field as a
reference you can measure the relative strength of the field in the region
of the magnet by measuring its deflection (according to the field theory). I
have done this and the field is about three times higher near the wire than
at the centre. This disproves the magnetic shell construction.

Another basic algorithm is the idea that a series of loops is like one loop
multiplied. Well if you do the same thing for six turns then the compass
measurement is the same near the wire than at the centre.

This shows that the basic algorithm of what is true on one is true of many
as one times the number of repetitions, is false.

I would like to propose a different model: that the magnet is responding to
spin-spin interactions as a quantum mechanical effect. These are entirely
electrostatic in nature.

The magnetic field does not exist it is fictitious.

The model of the magnetic effect of current is in reality the Lorenz
contraction of the moving electrons relative to the fixed charges in the
wire and the electrostatic force is mediated by virtual photons.

Since the electrons always occupy the same space in the wire even though
they are moving it shows that special relativity is an effect like
perspective.

The inductive effect is in reality caused by the acceleration of electrons.
Now these little charged particles are governed by quantum mechanics and the
energy states up the ladder are discontinuous and the electrons jump from
one state to the next the two states overlap and during the transition a
fluctuation occurs and a photon emission occurs, just like the hydrogen
spectrum.

This photon interacts with just one electron in another wire or the same
wire and imparts momentum and energy to change the electron from its
original state to its new state. This also means that the photon carries
momentum both linear and angular and energy.

This is both mutual and self inductance.

Chris

"The Real Chris" wrote in message
. uk...
If you make a single loop of wire bent into a circle and pass a regulated
1 amp current through it you will make a "magnetic field". According to
Gauss you have to imagine it is there and calculate accordingly. Then
comes an extraordinary performance of human intellect beginning with the
magnetic shells construction that shows that the field is uniform across
the plane of the loop.
---------
First of all, what theory indicates this?. The best you can say is that
there is a region near the center where the field is nearly uniform. The
size of the region is dependent on the size of the loop.
-----------

According to Carl Popper we should now measure it to see.

Using a compass as a tangent galvanometer with the earth's field as a
reference you can measure the relative strength of the field in the region
of the magnet by measuring its deflection (according to the field theory).
I have done this and the field is about three times higher near the wire
than at the centre. This disproves the magnetic shell construction.

Another basic algorithm is the idea that a series of loops is like one
loop multiplied. Well if you do the same thing for six turns then the
compass measurement is the same near the wire than at the centre.
----------
And if the loop diameter is tight enough and enough turns are present and
close enough, that is true. So what? It is explainable.
---------

This shows that the basic algorithm of what is true on one is true of many
as one times the number of repetitions, is false.

I would like to propose a different model: that the magnet is responding
to spin-spin interactions as a quantum mechanical effect. These are
entirely electrostatic in nature.

The magnetic field does not exist it is fictitious.

The model of the magnetic effect of current is in reality the Lorenz
contraction of the moving electrons relative to the fixed charges in the
wire and the electrostatic force is mediated by virtual photons.

Since the electrons always occupy the same space in the wire even though
they are moving it shows that special relativity is an effect like
perspective.

The inductive effect is in reality caused by the acceleration of
electrons. Now these little charged particles are governed by quantum
mechanics and the energy states up the ladder are discontinuous and the
electrons jump from one state to the next the two states overlap and
during the transition a fluctuation occurs and a photon emission occurs,
just like the hydrogen spectrum.

This photon interacts with just one electron in another wire or the same
wire and imparts momentum and energy to change the electron from its
original state to its new state. This also means that the photon carries
momentum both linear and angular and energy.

This is both mutual and self inductance.

Chris
-----
You have been through this all before. The problem is that you have shown
nothing new or exciting.
I have, on hand, an engineering textbook, which evaluates the forces on
moving charges in terms of the electric field.
For charge e1 moving at velocity v1 and charge v2 moving at velocity v2
F=(1/c^2)(q1v1 X(v2 X E21) where E21 is the electric field at q2 due to q1
Define B= (1/c^2)(v2 X E21) and you get
F=q1(v1 X B ) which is the Lorentz force equation (ignoring coulomb force)

A brief, less than one page, analysis then the text gets on to useful
electromagnetics in terms of measurable quantities .
This particular reference was originally written 40 years ago and the
material has been know and observed in physics for far longer. You have
added nothing except conjecture.

Note B is the magnetic flux density. Note also that B can be measured and no
unmeasurable "virtual photons" are needed. On the basis of this, one can
say the magnetic field is due to electrostatic effects between moving
charges. While this may be the source of the magnetic field, the field is
not ficticious.
Magnetic field concepts are based on what was and is observable.
All that you have is a more complex way of trying to define what is easily
defined now. Now how is a virtual photon any more real than a magnetic
field. Can you detect such a photon? The only reason to consider a photon is
that some cannot conceive of a force without a mechanical interaction so
come up with something virtual which can go bump in the night.

Is there any reason to bother using a more complex approach to handle a
problem when the complexity adds nothing? It has apparently led you into
strange ideas with regard to transformers and adding copper screens
etc.-ideas which fly in the face of facts.

--

Don Kelly
remove the X to answer
----------------------------

Sue... wrote:
The Real Chris top-posted:
Rubbish quantum mechanics it true at all energies. The energy of each of the
quanta are hf where f is the frequency of the exciter and the number of
quanta per cycle is the energy per cycle divided by hf. Nothing special
about low energies.

and wrote earlier:
The model of the magnetic effect of current is in reality the
Lorenz contraction of the moving electrons relative to the
fixed charges in the wire and the electrostatic force is
mediated by virtual photons.

Is there some way you can relate this Lorenz contraction
to the velocity of a electon in a conductor or electron beam?
I have seen a formula for that somewhere.

The photon energy you cite would depend on atomic
emission and absorbtion would it not? So we could
perhaps turn off the lights and watch the magnetism being formed.

Sue...

Wow! Another undiscovered use for the optical isolator!

--
Virg Wall, PE

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 19:05:47 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
wrote:

The Real Chris wrote:

On this page:

http://www.chrisspages.pwp.blueyonde...ransformer.htm

You say: "Another improvement is a copper screen round the outer winding
and another one round the inner winding to act as a screen against
photons escaping thus reducing losses still further."

Have you actually built this thing? That copper screen will form what we
in the EE biz call "a shorted turn".

That's nothing, really. One of his proposed fusion devices involved a
hydrogen-filled toroid with the "doughnut hole" 0.5 centimeters
across, wound with 10 turns of copper wire sized to carry 400 amps.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]