Re: Charged spinning disks

On May 19, 11:47 pm, Benj <bjac...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 18, 8:04 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You've taken a little liberty with what I've said.  The B field is not
fundmental. Is that better?  I guess Weber was a bigger crank than me,
even though he finally got Maxwell's attention and a full endorsement
of the theory by him before all was said and done.

So tell me more about Weber's theory and your theory that matches it.
I looked at the Assis book preview but it isn't quite clear to me [and
missing pages don't help matters] what is going on beyond that Weber
is taking into account retardation from moving charges (or is he?).
The fact the Weber theory is from the 1850s is in itself amazing and
also implies it needs a good modern review in the light of current
knowledge. So how do I find out more without forking over the $150 to
Amazon for this book?  Do you have any good online references or
summaries of the Weber Theory?

There are not many free articles avialable on the Web. A brief
summary of the theory and the logic behind it goes something like
this:

Descartes--"Every process is the sum of the interactions between it's
parts".
In matter, those parts are the fundamental charged particles of which
matter is composed. If the superposition principle holds, then all
macroscopic processes are the sum of the interactions between these
particles. In the case of parallel conductors, the magnetic forces
acting on them must be the net sum of the interactions between the
charges of which the conductors are composed. If, when such parallel
conductors have currents flowing in them, then there must be
additoinal forces developed between these particles besides the
Coulomb forces that existed between them while no current was
flowing. Thus in principle, the force between two point charges
cannot be accurately given by Coulombs law of charges, but rather this
law must be modified to account for the change in the force when these
charges have motion wrt each other.

Weber's expanded equation for point charges is one of many that have
been derived. Even classical physics has it's versions of such an
equation. Some are time independent, and some time dependent. Gauss
had a version previous to Webers, but his was quickly found to be
incorrect. I don't know the details of Gauss's theory. Purcell,
derives the same velocity dependence of the Coulomb force using length
contraction and contraction of the electric fields of point charges.
He uses a simplified form of the gamma factor given that
nonrelativistic drift rates are considered. This simplified factor is
equal to Weber's factor. Thus at high drift rates the two theories
will not agree unless the simplified factor is retained, in which case
Purcell's theory is no longer based in special relativity. High speed
parallel electron beams could be used to distinguish between Weber's
and Purcell's theories. There are also alternate versions of Purcell's
theory, corrects made by other authors. One uses time dilation rather
than length contraction. In either case, what we end up with is a
velocity term, which can be taken as a factor applied to either the
charges themselves or to the Coulomb constant, or both. Who knows
which it really modifies?

In my version, the electrons are taken to already be moving at c wrt
each other, and the drift is just an increase in the already existing
relative tangential speeds of the electrons. This requires that the
linear speed of the electron actually be (sqrt2)c, and thus this
version is inherently not in conformity with special relativistic
constraints on speed. The Coulomb force itself is thus also due to
the motions of electrons wrt each other, the drift of electrons
(current) is just an enhancement to the preexisting relative motion,
and thus also provides merely an an agumentation of the Coulomb
force. The equation is however mathematically identical to Webers,
since the factor (sqrt2)c cancels out when Coulombs force is solved
for. FWIW, some accounts of Weber's force seem to suggest that he held
the same view, some don't. I am not an expert on Weber, only on my
own independently derived version of the theory.










.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Charged spinning disks
    ... the radial separation between the charges. ... If the Coulomb force itself (between macroscopic ... influence that in turn requires relative motion before this influence ... Electrons tell space how to curve, and space tells electrons how to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Charged spinning disks
    ... Weber makes a number of assumtions, ... Weber force acting on the charges of the two particles, ... the electron from the atom while the electron is in its ground state. ... relavant to electron orbitals and energies. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Charged spinning disks
    ... Weber makes a number of assumtions, ... Weber force acting on the charges of the two particles, ... the electron from the atom while the electron is in its ground state. ... relavant to electron orbitals and energies. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Electo London Gravity ?
    ... > | The main difference between these two formulations of electromagnetism ... > | of interaction between the charges. ... While Weber ... Maxwell believed in a ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Permittivity and the Poynting vector
    ... > of interaction between the charges. ... > Weber's electrodynamics we have ... > a direct action between each pair of charges, ... {While Weber starts with force between the charges directly, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading