Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?
From: Franz Heymann (notfranz.heymann_at_btopenworld.com)
Date: 02/22/05
- Next message: rrattsprintverizonbell: "Re: China Military PK, Teleportation Experiments & Physics"
- Previous message: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- In reply to: JM Albuquerque: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- Next in thread: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:55:04 +0000 (UTC)
"JM Albuquerque" <jm.aREM.OVE@sapo.pt> wrote in message
news:37uke5F5jc50qU6@individual.net...
>
> "Androcles" <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> escreveu na mensagem
> news:C7lSd.177193$K7.35869@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> (snip)
>
> > I didn't know the modern ones disobeyed Gauss and Faraday's
> > laws, though.
>
> I meant that they only obey those Laws by a short period of time.
> I meant they are not continuous. They don't produce sine waves.
>
>
> (snip)
>
> > The electic motor guild paid a lot of money to Maxwell to add
aether
> > into his equations and publish them, secrets are best kept if you
tell a
> > half-truth and lie about the rest. :-)
>
> The subject is so complex that nobody really knows everything.
> There is no good picture of the electromagnetic mechanism.
Crap. Don't transfer your shortcomings on to other folk.
> All the pictures have strong arguments against them
Only the wrong ones. The correct picture inb the case of the rotating
dipole has been presented to you by more than one person, but you are
too stupid to recognise it.
> and that's
> what keeps us here trying to figure out the best picture.
No. It is only you who does not understand classical EM.
> Most of the people gets satisfied with equations and give up
> to figure a picture. They are not engineers and they never
> disassemble machines just for the fun and try to understand them.
> They claim there is no forces but they always use the safety belt
> when they drive a car.
> Magnetism is a force that acts at distance.
> In the case of sinusoidal AC machines (synchronous or induction)
> it is a matter of poles repelling similar poles (N-N or S-S), not
> poles attracting poles (N-S or S-N). Energy is stored during
> half cycle time and given the other half. There is a delay on the
> process. There is real power (equal to mechanical energy)
Power can not equal energy. They are different concepts.
> plus
> apparent power that is current flowing
Power is not current.
> out of phase with no work
> done, etc., etc.
Strawmen.
> What magnetism is a puzzle. Lines of force?
No, magnetism is not lines of force.
There is no explanation in classical physics for what lies at the root
of magnetism.
The explanation is to be sought in Quantum Electrodynamics.
> For sure it is a force even without knowing how a force can be
> transmitted at distance.
It is known quantitatively how electric and magnetic forces are
exerted.
As I said, the explanation exists in QED.
And only local effects are involved.
> For sure is not radiation because a 300
> MW (megawatt) generator translated into radiation will be a power
station
> that will emanate so much radiation that it will be seen light-years
away.
I don't know about 300 Megawatts, but I have handled 9 Megawatt
magnetrons, and I am pretty certain the long distance military radar
units transmit 30 Megawatts.
You are burbling because of your ignorance.
-- Franz "The great tragedy of science -- the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact." T.H. Huxley
- Next message: rrattsprintverizonbell: "Re: China Military PK, Teleportation Experiments & Physics"
- Previous message: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- In reply to: JM Albuquerque: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- Next in thread: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Is electromagnetic field theory unified?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|