Author Topic: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.  (Read 25710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #50 on: April 03, 2022, 09:26:35 pm »
Drifting electrons and holes make transistors work.
Flying electrons make vacuum tubes work.
Yes, i am ok with drifting electrons making transistors work. And flying electrons too.
But how do drifting electrons in a wire know that the wire is or isnt insulated?
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #51 on: April 03, 2022, 09:29:29 pm »
Quote
Old (electron) electricity can't explain how insulation lowers the speed of electricity on a wire
How do you know?
I know throo my own searches over a few months that there has not been any satisfactory or reasonable explanation.
I know throo my own reasoning that there can be no satisfactory or reasonable explanation.
That's strange because through my own searches over a few years and with my own reasoning I came to the opposite conclusion to you. But I can spell properly, so clearly my opinion is the more thoughtful and, hence, correct one.
A wonderful achievement. Congratulations. Have u told anyone of your explanation of how drifting electrons in a wire know whether the wire is insulated? And how exactly they adjust their speed or something?
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #52 on: April 03, 2022, 09:37:24 pm »
Drifting electrons and holes make transistors work.
Flying electrons make vacuum tubes work.
Yes, i am ok with drifting electrons making transistors work. And flying electrons too.
But how do drifting electrons in a wire know that the wire is or isnt insulated?
In a coaxial cable, see how the dielectric effects the speed of propagation of the voltage from center conductor to coaxial shield in any normal textbook.
In such a cable, the relevant variables as a function of time at a given plane cutting the cable are the voltage from center to outer conductors, and the net current in the center conductor.
Note that the coaxial transmission line is a generalization of Heaviside's triumphant demonstration of adding inductive loading with lumped-constant inductors to telegraph lines.
A commercial cable (e.g., RG-58/U) is an example of a good transmission line.  An insulated wire in an undefined environment (like from the bench to the floor) is a crummy ill-defined transmission line.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2022, 09:42:10 pm by TimFox »
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #53 on: April 03, 2022, 10:36:38 pm »
Drifting electrons and holes make transistors work.
Flying electrons make vacuum tubes work.
Yes, i am ok with drifting electrons making transistors work. And flying electrons too.
But how do drifting electrons in a wire know that the wire is or isnt insulated?
In a coaxial cable, see how the dielectric effects the speed of propagation of the voltage from center conductor to coaxial shield in any normal textbook.
In such a cable, the relevant variables as a function of time at a given plane cutting the cable are the voltage from center to outer conductors, and the net current in the center conductor.
Note that the coaxial transmission line is a generalization of Heaviside's triumphant demonstration of adding inductive loading with lumped-constant inductors to telegraph lines.
A commercial cable (e.g., RG-58/U) is an example of a good transmission line.  An insulated wire in an undefined environment (like from the bench to the floor) is a crummy ill-defined transmission line.

There is still no explanation of how internal drifting electrons (in the central wire in the coax)(& in the ordinary wire that is not a coax) change their speed, or the speed of the wavefront, based on
(1) whether there is internal dielectric (in the coax), or
(2) whether there is external insulation on the outside of the shield of the coax, or
(3) whether there is insulation on the outside of an ordinary wire.

Which raises an interesting question. What is the speed of electricity along a coax if the outer shield duznt have insulation on the outside?
I think that the speed of electricity along the central wire would depend on the speed of electricity in the dielectric (usually 2c/3).
And the speed along the outer shield would be the speed of electricity in air (ie c/1).
Two different speeds. Fast going out, slow coming back.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2022, 10:40:57 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #54 on: April 03, 2022, 10:45:18 pm »
Drifting electrons and holes make transistors work.
Flying electrons make vacuum tubes work.
Yes, i am ok with drifting electrons making transistors work. And flying electrons too.
But how do drifting electrons in a wire know that the wire is or isnt insulated?
In a coaxial cable, see how the dielectric effects the speed of propagation of the voltage from center conductor to coaxial shield in any normal textbook.
In such a cable, the relevant variables as a function of time at a given plane cutting the cable are the voltage from center to outer conductors, and the net current in the center conductor.
Note that the coaxial transmission line is a generalization of Heaviside's triumphant demonstration of adding inductive loading with lumped-constant inductors to telegraph lines.
A commercial cable (e.g., RG-58/U) is an example of a good transmission line.  An insulated wire in an undefined environment (like from the bench to the floor) is a crummy ill-defined transmission line.

There is still no explanation of how internal drifting electrons (in the central wire in the coax)(& in the ordinary wire that is not a coax) change their speed, or the speed of the wavefront, based on
(1) whether there is internal dielectric (in the coax), or
(2) whether there is external insulation on the outside of the shield of the coax, or
(3) whether there is insulation on the outside of an ordinary wire.

Which raises an interesting question. What is the speed of electricity along a coax if the outer shield duznt have insulation on the outside?
I think that the speed of electricity along the central wire would depend on the speed of electricity in the dielectric (usually 2c/3).
And the speed along the outer shield would be the speed of electricity in air (ie c/1).
Two different speeds. Fast going out, slow coming back.

In a transmission line, the observable variables are the voltage across and the current down the cable, that I discussed in my reply.
That is "electricity" moving through the cable.  The electrons respond in their own manner.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #55 on: April 03, 2022, 11:10:28 pm »
Drifting electrons and holes make transistors work.
Flying electrons make vacuum tubes work.
Yes, i am ok with drifting electrons making transistors work. And flying electrons too.
But how do drifting electrons in a wire know that the wire is or isnt insulated?
In a coaxial cable, see how the dielectric effects the speed of propagation of the voltage from center conductor to coaxial shield in any normal textbook.
In such a cable, the relevant variables as a function of time at a given plane cutting the cable are the voltage from center to outer conductors, and the net current in the center conductor.
Note that the coaxial transmission line is a generalization of Heaviside's triumphant demonstration of adding inductive loading with lumped-constant inductors to telegraph lines.
A commercial cable (e.g., RG-58/U) is an example of a good transmission line.  An insulated wire in an undefined environment (like from the bench to the floor) is a crummy ill-defined transmission line.

There is still no explanation of how internal drifting electrons (in the central wire in the coax)(& in the ordinary wire that is not a coax) change their speed, or the speed of the wavefront, based on
(1) whether there is internal dielectric (in the coax), or
(2) whether there is external insulation on the outside of the shield of the coax, or
(3) whether there is insulation on the outside of an ordinary wire.

Which raises an interesting question. What is the speed of electricity along a coax if the outer shield duznt have insulation on the outside?
I think that the speed of electricity along the central wire would depend on the speed of electricity in the dielectric (usually 2c/3).
And the speed along the outer shield would be the speed of electricity in air (ie c/1).
Two different speeds. Fast going out, slow coming back.

In a transmission line, the observable variables are the voltage across and the current down the cable, that I discussed in my reply.
That is "electricity" moving through the cable.  The electrons respond in their own manner.
If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #56 on: April 03, 2022, 11:13:24 pm »
Here is one attempt to wave away the "insulation catastrophe".
William Beaty
Electrical Engineer 35yrs, electrostatics hobbyist, Amasci siteUpdated Jun 16

Is it true that electric currents are normally much faster than the actual electrons?

Well …is it true that air currents are much faster than the actual air? Yep.
•   If you blow into a hose, the air in the far end of the hose starts moving instantly. Actually there’s a tiny delay before it starts moving: the speed of sound. Currents of air have a “startup-wave,” which is the same as a sound wave. The current moves at hundreds of KPH, while the air itself moves slow. (And, if rather than blowing, instead you sucked on the end of the hose, then what happens? Instead the air-currents travel opposite to the direction of the air! The air moves toward your lips, while the “current” races in the opposite direction, going out to the far end of the hose.)
•   Is it true that water currents are much faster than actual water? Yes, water currents travel at the speed of sound. Step into a pool or pond, and the water level rises everywhere at the same time (after a speed-of-sound delay.) All the water moved slightly outward, away from your intruding foot. Now lift your foot back out. A “wave of decrease” races outwards, as all the water is slightly moved towards your foot.
•   Is it true that “wood currents” are much faster than the actual wood? Yes, if you pick up a broom from one end, all the wood seems to move instantly. The wood-currents seem to appear everywhere in the wood. But there’s actually a small delay …from the speed of sound inside wood! The wood-current travels faster than the actual wood. (Heh, and if you lifted the broom handle sideways, then you generated a transverse wave, which travels slightly slower than pressure-waves inside wood. S-waves versus P-waves in solids.)
•   Is it true that “train-car currents” are faster than actual train-cars? Yep. If you’ve heard a long freight-train starting up, maybe you’ve heard the “booms” as the couplings between cars are suddenly tightened. The train itself moves slowly forwards, and the “boom-boom-booms” races backwards along the chain of cars. Train-currents are very fast! Also, they’re backwards!
________________________________________
PS
Electric currents have another name: ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES! That’s why currents (and voltage) in wires will always travel at the speed of light. [1]
When the electricity inside a wire starts to flow, it doesn’t actually all flow at once. Instead, all the movable charges are using e-fields to “talk” with their neighbors. When one electron is forced to move, the surrounding e-fields change, and this moves the next electron in the chain …which changes that electron’s surrounding fields, which then moves the next one. It’s like a long row of train-cars, going “boom-boom-boom-boom.” Wires contain long columns of electrons. Fast EM waves travel along these columns, “informing” all the electrons to start moving.
Heh, electric companies don’t sell “electricity.” Instead they sell electromagnetic waves! (The EM waves at 60Hz frequency.) The electricity just sits inside the wires and wiggles back and forth. Electricity doesn’t travel to your home. The electric companies are actually selling us some 60Hz photons.


Also, these waves of e-fields are not moving inside the metal wires. Instead, the fields are out in the air, in the space surrounding the wires. The “startup wave” is leapfrogging through space, skipping across billions of electrons on the surface of the wire.

In other words, wires are like energy-ducts. Wires behave something like hoses full of air, with sound waves racing along, while the “air” inside moves slowly. Also, the “air” in the hose can wiggle back and forth, while the energy zooms along in just one direction.
Too complicated?
Just remember that the flow-rate of these energy-waves is measured in watts, while the flow-rate of the electricity inside the copper is measured in amperes. Two kinds of flow, with two different units of measurement. For AC circuitry, the amperes are a back-and-forth wiggle, while the watts are an EM wave at the speed of light. (It’s a lot like wiggling air …versus moving sound waves.)
________________________________________
[1] In wires the current usually propagates slightly slower than light in a vacuum, going slower than “c”. This happens whenever the wire is encased in plastic, not in vacuum. The plastic insulation slows down the waves of current …much like the glass in a prism slows down the light waves passing through it. The electrical waves will propagate at 2/3 of “c,” or even slower, depending on the type of plastic. Search for… “velocity factor” in cables.


« Last Edit: April 04, 2022, 12:26:27 am by aetherist »
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #57 on: April 03, 2022, 11:16:55 pm »
Something causes the electrons to drift, not the other way 'round.
Applied voltage, time-changing magnetic flux, photons, thermoelectric effects, etc.
I am speaking of physical observables, like when you connect a transmission line to an oscilloscope, or a wire to an ammeter and voltmeter.
Maxwell and theories derived from his theories treat electricity.
Solid-state physics, working from quantum mechanics, discusses how the electrons behave in metal conductors in response to electrical causes.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #58 on: April 03, 2022, 11:22:08 pm »
Here is another explanation by William Beaty.

Is the speed of electricity in a wire (signal speed) related to the speed of light (a function of the permeability and permittivity of space) or the speed of sound (based on nearest neighbor interactions of electrons)?
 
Signals on wires aren’t a “nearest neighbor” phenomenon. Instead, when electrons move, they create altered EM fields and altered attraction/repulsion forces. These forces are experienced by distant electrons in the wire, not just by the close neighbors in adjacent atoms. Next, those distant electrons are, again, moved by those long-range EM field-forces …which then send out new fields, which affect even more distant electrons in the wire.
In other words, the vibrations of one electron can “leapfrog” across large distances and pass over immense numbers of electrons. If electrons are like a chain, then the “yank” isn’t going from link to link, instead it’s an EM wave which ripples through the space outside the links, yet is guided by the row of links (the column of mobile electrons in the wire surface.)
This effect, plus the extremely low mass of electrons, leads to signal-velocities closely approaching lightspeed. And, since these fields DON’T travel inside the metal of the wires …if we place some ferrite or some plastic insulation just outside the wires, the “leapfrogging fields” must pass through that material, and this has an enormous effect on the speed of the signals
 

Offline penfold

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: gb
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #59 on: April 03, 2022, 11:22:55 pm »
[...]
If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.

Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #60 on: April 03, 2022, 11:23:27 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #61 on: April 03, 2022, 11:32:39 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
I think that Beaty's leapfrogging em radiation( leapfrogging out of the wire & into the insulation & back into the wire)(at the speed of light in the insulation) would not satisfy many, it duznt satisfy me. But i am happy to quote any attempts, good or bad, there being no good attempts, which is why i am here.

I have never objected that Einstein's papers were not peer reviewed, my objection was that papers that i was quoting were objected to by many here koz the papers were not peer reviewed, whilst that same many were claiming that the sun shone out of Einstein's bum, even tho his papers were not peer reviewed.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #62 on: April 03, 2022, 11:57:19 pm »
[...]If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
Yes. The Veritasium gedanken & the AlphaPhoenix-X show that the main current (whatever it is) takes the usual time to go around along a circuit, but that there can be a very early induced small current in the parallel wire (induced by the em radiation from the main current). And we see the same induction effect at a capacitor, albeit a strong current (strong due to the small gap)(& strong due to the large area of metal)(& strong due to the magnification of the dielectric in the gap).

My new (elekton) elekticity involves the main current being due to elektons hugging the wire. And, at a capacitor it involves the induction of charge on the positive plate. And on a parallel wire it involves the induction of (repulsion of) surface electrons. And, inside the wire, it involves the movement (drift) of conduction electrons.

There is a lot of similarity tween my new (elekton) elekticity & the old (electron) electricity. In both, the Poynting Field describes things but does nothing.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2023, 06:27:27 am by aetherist »
 

Offline SandyCox

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • Country: gb
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #63 on: April 04, 2022, 08:12:20 am »
[...]If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
Yes. The Veritasium gedanken & the AlphaPhoenix-X show that the main current (whatever it is) takes the usual time to go around along a circuit, but that there can be a very early induced small current in the parallel wire (induced by the em radiation from the main current). And we see the same induction effect at a capacitor, albeit a strong current (strong due to the small gap)(& strong due to the large area of metal)(& strong due to the magnification of the dielectric in the gap).

My new (electon) electricity involves the main current being due to electons hugging the wire. And, at a capacitor it involves the induction of charge on the positive plate. And on a parallel wire it involves the induction of (repulsion of) surface electrons. And, inside the wire, it involves the movement (drift) of conduction electrons.

There is a lot of similarity tween my new (electon) electricity & the old (electron) electricity. In both, the Poynting Field describes things but does nothing.
The initial current isn't necessarily very small. If the resistance of the bulb is equal to twice the characteristic impedance of the transmission line (perfect series matching), then the initial current is equal to half the steady-state current. My attached note explains this.
 

Offline SandyCox

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • Country: gb
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #64 on: April 04, 2022, 08:34:45 am »
Quote
Old (electron) electricity can't explain how insulation lowers the speed of electricity on a wire
How do you know?
I know throo my own searches over a few months that there has not been any satisfactory or reasonable explanation.
I know throo my own reasoning that there can be no satisfactory or reasonable explanation.
It can. Look at this paper: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9586871
 

Offline penfold

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: gb
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #65 on: April 04, 2022, 10:45:50 am »
[...]If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
Yes. The Veritasium gedanken & the AlphaPhoenix-X show that the main current (whatever it is) takes the usual time to go around along a circuit, but that there can be a very early induced small current in the parallel wire (induced by the em radiation from the main current). And we see the same induction effect at a capacitor, albeit a strong current (strong due to the small gap)(& strong due to the large area of metal)(& strong due to the magnification of the dielectric in the gap).

My new (electon) electricity involves the main current being due to electons hugging the wire. And, at a capacitor it involves the induction of charge on the positive plate. And on a parallel wire it involves the induction of (repulsion of) surface electrons. And, inside the wire, it involves the movement (drift) of conduction electrons.

There is a lot of similarity tween my new (electon) electricity & the old (electron) electricity. In both, the Poynting Field describes things but does nothing.

Then why is your theory needed? As far as "electricity" on the macro-scale, the classical theory shows no weaknesses. As far as Poynting describing but not explaining... that's the entire of physics... it describes and models. The term "fundamental" is often used to imply that a theory or explanation is actually starting to get close to a fundamental truth, but really what it means is that the theory is more general. A more generalised version of "electricity" involves quantum mechanics because the J-field is believed to be made up of "charges that have velocity", those charges are believed to be what we call electrons and are known to behave quantum-mechanically in confined spaces generally, in orbits of atoms and inside conductors. Quantum mechanics is a big area of physics and it's difficult to really start answering questions from just cursory knowledge, so we tend not to in macro-scale electrical circuits because EM works fine. Taking the scale down to a nano-metre scale semiconductor, then quantum is a big factor that cannot be ignored. It's not necessarily that any one theory is more fundamental, just more or less applicable, suitable or efficient for a particular case.

The problem with composing a theory as such you have is that the only test cases available are ones that are already described by a very well established theory. Any new theory only has those existing observations to give an explanation to, so it would be the exact same theory, maybe in different maths, but the results must be the same unless there's a genuine problem to address. If there was a genuine problem or discrepancy, then it must be isolated and better studied... but there are none.
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #66 on: April 04, 2022, 02:07:59 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
I think that Beaty's leapfrogging em radiation( leapfrogging out of the wire & into the insulation & back into the wire)(at the speed of light in the insulation) would not satisfy many, it duznt satisfy me. But i am happy to quote any attempts, good or bad, there being no good attempts, which is why i am here.

I have never objected that Einstein's papers were not peer reviewed, my objection was that papers that i was quoting were objected to by many here koz the papers were not peer reviewed, whilst that same many were claiming that the sun shone out of Einstein's bum, even tho his papers were not peer reviewed.

In another one of these threads, you objected by my statement that the editors of Annalen der Physik (as good a pair as any other peers at the time) had reviewed Einstein's papers before publication by claiming that opening the mail to confirm the address is not peer review, to which I replied that opening the file to confirm the address is how stuff gets on YouTube.
 

Offline penfold

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: gb
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #67 on: April 04, 2022, 06:54:46 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
[...]
I have never objected that Einstein's papers were not peer reviewed, my objection was that papers that i was quoting were objected to by many here koz the papers were not peer reviewed, whilst that same many were claiming that the sun shone out of Einstein's bum, even tho his papers were not peer reviewed.

Review or not, it is generally accepted that the work of Einstein has been substantiated through the vast body of work that has been peer-reviewed and subjected to the rigors of modern scientific process. Even if Einstein's work was somehow proven wrong, it would not diminish his brilliantness of having come up with such a well rationalized theory - it wasn't just a random imagining, there is a lot of hard work behind it.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #68 on: April 04, 2022, 09:04:51 pm »
I see that D'Abramo & Jefimenko preceded me in pointing out that Purcell stinx.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2108.07169.pdf
A note on Purcell’s basic explanation of magnetic forces Germano D’Abramo
Abstract. In the 1960s, E.M. Purcell presented a basic explanation of the magnetic force experienced by a test charge moving parallel to a stationary current-carrying wire. According to Purcell’s derivation, this force results from the difference between the relativistic length contraction of the distance among the stationary positive charges of the wire and the relativistic length contraction of the distance among the negative charges moving in the wire, when the charges are observed in the rest frame of the test charge. The contraction difference generates a charge density unbalance that in the rest frame of the test charge is experienced as an electrostatic force, while in the lab frame is perceived as the magnetic force. In the present paper, we show that Purcell’s approach is problematic since it generates inconsistencies and paradoxes. We maintain that Purcell’s derivation has only an illustrative and expository value and should not be taken literally as describing something that really and physically happens in the wire. Furthermore, we believe that the difficulties pointed out here should be explicitly presented and discussed when introducing Purcell’s approach in physics courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels.

 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #69 on: April 04, 2022, 09:12:25 pm »
[...]If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
Yes. The Veritasium gedanken & the AlphaPhoenix-X show that the main current (whatever it is) takes the usual time to go around along a circuit, but that there can be a very early induced small current in the parallel wire (induced by the em radiation from the main current). And we see the same induction effect at a capacitor, albeit a strong current (strong due to the small gap)(& strong due to the large area of metal)(& strong due to the magnification of the dielectric in the gap).

My new (electon) electricity involves the main current being due to electons hugging the wire. And, at a capacitor it involves the induction of charge on the positive plate. And on a parallel wire it involves the induction of (repulsion of) surface electrons. And, inside the wire, it involves the movement (drift) of conduction electrons.

There is a lot of similarity tween my new (electon) electricity & the old (electron) electricity. In both, the Poynting Field describes things but does nothing.
The initial current isn't necessarily very small. If the resistance of the bulb is equal to twice the characteristic impedance of the transmission line (perfect series matching), then the initial current is equal to half the steady-state current. My attached note explains this.
That might be so. But, i think that we have two electricitys, proper steady state electricity, & transient electricity.
Induction is transient electricity. It has a different strength at different places at different times. And is then killed when the steady state electricity eventually arrives.  In a capacitor it falls to zero. It comes & goes before we know it, except of course if AC instead of DC.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #70 on: April 04, 2022, 09:17:51 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
I think that Beaty's leapfrogging em radiation( leapfrogging out of the wire & into the insulation & back into the wire)(at the speed of light in the insulation) would not satisfy many, it duznt satisfy me. But i am happy to quote any attempts, good or bad, there being no good attempts, which is why i am here.

I have never objected that Einstein's papers were not peer reviewed, my objection was that papers that i was quoting were objected to by many here koz the papers were not peer reviewed, whilst that same many were claiming that the sun shone out of Einstein's bum, even tho his papers were not peer reviewed.
In another one of these threads, you objected by my statement that the editors of Annalen der Physik (as good a pair as any other peers at the time) had reviewed Einstein's papers before publication by claiming that opening the mail to confirm the address is not peer review, to which I replied that opening the file to confirm the address is how stuff gets on YouTube.
Yes, of course the editors did their own peer review, they would not print obvious nonsense, but in Einsteinist's case they did print nonsense (STR & GTR).
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #71 on: April 04, 2022, 09:25:00 pm »
STR and GTR (to use your ugly abbreviations) are not nonsense--they are logically internally compatible theories.
Your attempts to cite evidence that they are not physically correct are not convincing.
As one of many examples, my former employer manufactured devices that accelerated electrons to a kinetic energy between 1 and 25 MeV. which is far above the electron rest mass of 0.511 MeV/c2, and they behaved exactly how the Special Theory of Relativity predicts.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #72 on: April 04, 2022, 09:25:35 pm »
[...]If the electrons merely respond (which i agree with) then ok this avoids the "insulation catastrophe". But, it then contradicts any old electricity theory that claims that drifting electrons cause the electricity.
Err... you still haven't defined "the electricity"... that is an incredibly important definition to get right. Conventionally, the arrival of power emitted from point A arriving at point B, does not depend on a continuous movement of electrons along the length of the wire... it can happen, but it's not essential. Current is just one of the fields within Maxwell that so happens to only occur in the presence of charges. Poynting's theorem explains this phenomenon (reasonably) exactly, the exactness depends on how much of the physical circuit is included in the mathematical model.
Yes. The Veritasium gedanken & the AlphaPhoenix-X show that the main current (whatever it is) takes the usual time to go around along a circuit, but that there can be a very early induced small current in the parallel wire (induced by the em radiation from the main current). And we see the same induction effect at a capacitor, albeit a strong current (strong due to the small gap)(& strong due to the large area of metal)(& strong due to the magnification of the dielectric in the gap).

My new (electon) electricity involves the main current being due to electons hugging the wire. And, at a capacitor it involves the induction of charge on the positive plate. And on a parallel wire it involves the induction of (repulsion of) surface electrons. And, inside the wire, it involves the movement (drift) of conduction electrons.

There is a lot of similarity tween my new (electon) electricity & the old (electron) electricity. In both, the Poynting Field describes things but does nothing.
Then why is your theory needed? As far as "electricity" on the macro-scale, the classical theory shows no weaknesses. As far as Poynting describing but not explaining... that's the entire of physics... it describes and models. The term "fundamental" is often used to imply that a theory or explanation is actually starting to get close to a fundamental truth, but really what it means is that the theory is more general. A more generalised version of "electricity" involves quantum mechanics because the J-field is believed to be made up of "charges that have velocity", those charges are believed to be what we call electrons and are known to behave quantum-mechanically in confined spaces generally, in orbits of atoms and inside conductors. Quantum mechanics is a big area of physics and it's difficult to really start answering questions from just cursory knowledge, so we tend not to in macro-scale electrical circuits because EM works fine. Taking the scale down to a nano-metre scale semiconductor, then quantum is a big factor that cannot be ignored. It's not necessarily that any one theory is more fundamental, just more or less applicable, suitable or efficient for a particular case.

The problem with composing a theory as such you have is that the only test cases available are ones that are already described by a very well established theory. Any new theory only has those existing observations to give an explanation to, so it would be the exact same theory, maybe in different maths, but the results must be the same unless there's a genuine problem to address. If there was a genuine problem or discrepancy, then it must be isolated and better studied... but there are none.
Old (electron) electricity fails to explain how electricity propagates at the speed of light c/1 along a wire. Bearing in mind that the speed of em radiation in Cu is 10 m/s DC, & less if AC.
And, old (electron) electricity fails to explain how drifting electrons inside a wire know that the wire has an insulation coating, ie the drifting electrons decide to propagate the electricity at 2c/3 instead of c/1.
So that is why i discovered my new (elekton) elekticity, ie elekticity is in the photons hugging the wire.
This must rate as the best scientific discovery of 2021. And more.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2023, 06:28:52 am by aetherist »
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #73 on: April 04, 2022, 09:35:13 pm »
Are your citations from William Beaty peer reviewed?  You objected that Einstein's papers were not.
[...]I have never objected that Einstein's papers were not peer reviewed, my objection was that papers that i was quoting were objected to by many here koz the papers were not peer reviewed, whilst that same many were claiming that the sun shone out of Einstein's bum, even tho his papers were not peer reviewed.
Review or not, it is generally accepted that the work of Einstein has been substantiated through the vast body of work that has been peer-reviewed and subjected to the rigors of modern scientific process. Even if Einstein's work was somehow proven wrong, it would not diminish his brilliantness of having come up with such a well rationalized theory - it wasn't just a random imagining, there is a lot of hard work behind it.
Every one of Einsteinist's gedankens is rubbish. His spacetime is rubbish. His good predictions & postdictions were due to luck, not good science. It is well known that Mrs Einstein wrote STR. And she wrote the photoelectric effect for which he got his Nobel. And it was Minkowski that developed STR.
As science gets more& more accurate STR & GTR will be seen even moreso to fail, ie in addition to the old failures.
The JamesWebb will add to the known failures.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2022, 02:34:16 am by aetherist »
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #74 on: April 04, 2022, 09:40:49 pm »
So, the demonstrated fact that the electron accelerators I mentioned behave according to Einstein's 1905 paper in Annalen der Physik "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies" (English title) is due to other people, including Frau Einstein and Mr Minkowski?  Does that change physical reality? 
 
The following users thanked this post: penfold


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf