I thought that a magnetic field was a flow of electrons from one pole to the other along flux lines?
Wow, great explanation. Thanks.No, its (somewhat tautologically) a component in an electromagnetic field. The magnetic field of the Earth (and anything else for that matter) bends the motion of electrons and other charged particles as they stream in from the Sun or elsewhere in the universe. Due to the equation I asked PP to provide me which relates the force on a charge due to its charge and the surrounding electric and magnetic fields there's a preferred path for an electron to move along, which involves spirally down to or up away from the poles.
A flow of electrons is a current and this would require some energy input it is were in any way obstructed. A flow of current is easy to measure for and a magnet doesn't have such a current, all of its atoms are relatively stationary and the net movement of electrons in the cation lattice is zero. You can induce a current in the magnet by moving another magnet past it, ala a generator, but the magnetic field is still there when there's no net flow of charge.
No, its (somewhat tautologically) a component in an electromagnetic field. The magnetic field of the Earth (and anything else for that matter) bends the motion of electrons and other charged particles as they stream in from the Sun or elsewhere in the universe. Due to the equation I asked PP to provide me which relates the force on a charge due to its charge and the surrounding electric and magnetic fields there's a preferred path for an electron to move along, which involves spirally down to or up away from the poles.
A flow of electrons is a current and this would require some energy input it is were in any way obstructed. A flow of current is easy to measure for and a magnet doesn't have such a current, all of its atoms are relatively stationary and the net movement of electrons in the cation lattice is zero. You can induce a current in the magnet by moving another magnet past it, ala a generator, but the magnetic field is still there when there's no net flow of charge.
Now I'm a pretty broad-minded person, but when I read this quote from you in an earlier thread I deeply regretted suggesting that you ask a campus professor to discuss your ideas.Pincho said:I have solved the theory of everything, but I'm an artist, and not a scientist, or mathematician. I have been solving problems using it for about 2 weeks now. It's incredibly flexible. I think my IQ must be about 2000 by now.
hah! Pincho, I think it's fair to say that when Pete is making fun of you it is well deserved.
Now I'm a pretty broad-minded person, but when I read this quote from you in an earlier thread I deeply regretted suggesting that you ask a campus professor to discuss your ideas.
You're the oene who said magnets shine electrons. And given we have no evidence for the aether (and a lot against it in one form or another) but we have evidence for electrons I'll stick with electrons for the time being.You are calling the Aether electrons again.
Don't you realise you're talking about a substance you haven't demonstrated exists. Furthermore you have no knowledge of experiments into the subatomic so what are you basing your claims on? Nothing.Don't you realise that the Aether takes on the properties of certain particles when it is scaled to their size.
Given you haven't read any relativity and you're utterly unfamiliar with science you demonstrate again you simply tell lie after lie, without any pretence of even trying to justify or make them sound believable.All you are talking about is the scaling down that confused Einstein and brought around the Theory Of Relativity
I didn't nootice he said he thinks his IQ is 2000.Now I'm a pretty broad-minded person, but when I read this quote from you in an earlier thread I deeply regretted suggesting that you ask a campus professor to discuss your ideas.
You're the oene who said magnets shine electrons. And given we have no evidence for the aether (and a lot against it in one form or another) but we have evidence for electrons I'll stick with electrons for the time being.
It would seem all you do is just back peddle and reword things whenever anyone points out a mistake.
Don't you realise you're talking about a substance you haven't demonstrated exists. Furthermore you have no knowledge of experiments into the subatomic so what are you basing your claims on? Nothing.
Given you haven't read any relativity and you're utterly unfamiliar with science you demonstrate again you simply tell lie after lie, without any pretence of even trying to justify or make them sound believable.
I didn't nootice he said he thinks his IQ is 2000.
Whoever the mods are surely that's yet more evidence PP is either trolling or not worth giving any bandwidth. If he's thick enough to believe the drivel he types he don't add anything and if he's trolling make him waste his life elsewhere.
No offense taken, AN. You've dedicated your life to Physics and I acknowledge that you're a very well educated automaton. You'd be the first guy I went to if I had a question about anything already discovered and written about in the textbooks.AlphaNumeric said:Though it almost pains me to say it, when RJBeery, QWC and Noodler become rational and informed in comparison to someone surely a line is crossed (half hearted offence not really intended guys).
...
But I don't know the next step. I don't know what to do with the information, but it is very special, and needs the right sort of attention.
...
See I can't honestly believe that you believe what you say. Someone with that level of detachment from reality and just blind stupidity is going to get hit by a bus or eat ant killer around age 7, never mind manage to feed and cloth themselves later in life by having a job. Hence I think you're trolling. There's a fine line between delusional ego and trolling and you've crossed it.I said at least 2000, look I figured something out with 6 billion people around me, not to mention the whole of history. That's pretty good.