Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #642580 > unrolled thread

Page19, 3-4, Maxwell Equations of Old Physics, errors all over the place/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Page19, 3-4, Maxwell Equations of Old Physics, errors all over the place/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-25 23:38 -0700
    Page20, 3-5, the AP-Maxwell Equations/ Atom-Totality-Universe / textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-25 23:47 -0700
      Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 00:08 -0700
        Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 03:19 -0700
          Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 03:49 -0700
            Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 13:20 -0700
              B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 15:54 -0700
                Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 17:32 -0700
                  Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 23:32 -0700
                    Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 03:23 -0700
                      Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 03:39 -0700
                        AP-Ohm's law V =B/D rather than V = i*R Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 03:58 -0700
                          Re: AP-Ohm's law V =B/D rather than V = i*R Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 04:07 -0700
                            Re: AP-Ohm's law V =B/D rather than V = i*R Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 12:30 -0700
                              Re: AP-Ohm's law V =B/D rather than V = i*R Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 17:17 -0700
                                Re: AP-Ohm's law V =B/D rather than V = i*R Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 18:46 -0700
                                  is Resistance the angular momentum of a Magnetic Field Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 22:53 -0700
                                    Re: is Resistance the angular momentum of a Magnetic Field Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 02:11 -0700
                                      Re: is Resistance the angular momentum of a Magnetic Field Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 03:22 -0700
                                        what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 13:20 -0700
                                          Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 16:32 -0700
                                            Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 23:52 -0700
                                              Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 00:12 -0700
                                                Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 01:03 -0700
                                                  Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 15:41 -0700
                                                    Yes, yet again I have to re-do the Maxwell Equations Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 14:25 -0700
                                                      Re: Yes, yet again I have to re-do the Maxwell Equations Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 15:44 -0700
                        Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-27 14:44 +0000

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#643208 — Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

I wrote:
> Thus, our Ohm's law is V = i * B* L
> 
> What is L, anyway, some form of Angular Momentum?
> 
> 

I think this term L is the spin term in not only EM but in EM gravity

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643230 — Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

Alright, performed some experiments but no resolutions became of them. I am back with even more questions::


Does V = i*R hold up? Yes 

kg*m^2 /A*s^3 = (A) * kg*m^2 /A^2*s^3  Yes yes yes 

Now, factor out a Magnetic Field from Resistance 

m^2/(A*s) times kg/A*s^2 

So, to make a Ohm's law without a Resistance we need to know what is L where L is m^2/(A*s) 

Thus, our Ohm's law is V = i * B* L 

What is L, anyway, some form of Angular Momentum? 

I tried DC Voltage and AC Voltage, where I get more and stronger fluctuations in DC.

I call it Ambient Voltage where I just walk around waving the electrodes.

Some will think it is the multimeter having to "settle down" before reading "something real"

I believe it is the reality that we live in a Atom Totality, thus, space is an electron cloud and much like the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, CMBR, that Space is Ambient Voltage.

In my view CMBR is a part of what I am reading by the Voltmeter. I believe the CMBR is what is registering on my voltmeter, along with Ambient Voltage that makes up Space.

Now last night and today, the highest reading was .08 Volts DC voltage.

Now in the lab, I found out that waving the electrodes around in air gets the highest numbers, but that as you hold the two electrodes together closed loop, 0 voltage comes out, regardless of waving in air. So if the electrodes are touching the voltage is 0, but if the electrodes are free of each other and waving in space, the readings are anywhere from .001 to .08 Volts

Now I have an expensive Fluke multimeter to do this experiment, and other devices may not show anything, just because they are cheap models. So delicate is my multimeter, that if I set it down with electrodes open and wait for it to register 000 volts, then I get up and approach the electrodes, they sense my presence and read .001 Volts. Now, whether the multimeter senses my "electrical laden body" or whether my body stirred up the space causing the .001 reading.

Now, I have a very powerful magnet, very very powerful, so powerful it has become a pain in the butt to pry off of anything.

And when I have the multimeter rested reading 000 now I rub the magnet up against the wires, the coated wires of the electrodes, and sort of like rub back and forth on the wires, that the readings of Voltage is a vigorous fluctuations as if I were waving the electrodes. So the magnet replaces the waving around of the electrodes.

The Magnetic Field is kg/A*s^2 and the term of m^2/(A*s) which is some sort of Angular Momentum is what I believe the magnet rubbing up against the electrode wires is doing, is doing a m^2/(A*s) motion and that combining that motion with the Magnetic Field of the magnet, I end up with a Voltage.

That is my interpretation.

Anyone can repeat what I have done. The difficult part is to interpret what was done and what was registered.

But slowly and slowly, over the years, I have come finally to the idea that the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, the CMBR is Ambient Voltage of an Atom Totality Universe. And anyone, everyone can measure it with a voltmeter.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643354 — Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

Alright, if this new Ohm's law is true V = i*B*L vice the old V = i*R. Then i have to go back and do the Maxwell Equations differentiation with 3 variables in the Product rule and Quotient rule

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643358 — Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 2:12:37 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alright, if this new Ohm's law is true V = i*B*L vice the old V = i*R. Then i have to go back and do the Maxwell Equations differentiation with 3 variables in the Product rule and Quotient rule
> 
> 

Now the product rule for that would be 

V' = (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643452 — Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 3:03:55 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 2:12:37 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > Alright, if this new Ohm's law is true V = i*B*L vice the old V = i*R. Then i have to go back and do the Maxwell Equations differentiation with 3 variables in the Product rule and Quotient rule
> > 
> > 
> 
> Now the product rule for that would be 
> 
> V' = (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L'

Let us see the Product Rule for two and three terms is

(f*g)' = f'g + fg'

(f*g*h)' = f'gh + fg'h + fgh'

Quotient Rule for two and three terms

(f/g)' = (f'g - fg') / g^2  note the subtraction vice addition

(f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh') / (gh)^2  not sure that division of three terms has a rule, better check with sci.math for these derivatives can get tricky

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643692 — Yes, yet again I have to re-do the Maxwell Equations Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 5:41:08 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 3:03:55 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 2:12:37 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > Alright, if this new Ohm's law is true V = i*B*L vice the old V = i*R. Then i have to go back and do the Maxwell Equations differentiation with 3 variables in the Product rule and Quotient rule
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > Now the product rule for that would be 
> > 
> > V' = (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L'
> 
> Let us see the Product Rule for two and three terms is
> 
> (f*g)' = f'g + fg'
> 
> (f*g*h)' = f'gh + fg'h + fgh'
> 
> Quotient Rule for two and three terms
> 
> (f/g)' = (f'g - fg') / g^2  note the subtraction vice addition
> 
> (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh') / (gh)^2  not sure that division of three terms has a rule, better check with sci.math for these derivatives can get tricky
> 
> AP


Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 06:23:41 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh') / (gh)^2 is that mathematically correct?
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 13:23:42 +0000


Alright, looking good so far. I ran a test sample of x^7/(x^2*x^3) knowing the answer must be 2x. And my guess of the correct formula delivers 7x^6*x^5 - x^7*2*x^4 - x^9*3*x^2 divided by x^10. 

AP


Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 13:44:40 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: continuing with the Maxwell Equations as differentiation of New Ohm's
 law V = i*B*L Re: (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh') / (gh)^2 is that
 mathematically correct?
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 20:44:40 +0000


continuing with the Maxwell Equations as differentiation of New Ohm's law V = i*B*L Re: (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh') / (gh)^2 is that mathematically correct?

On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 1:46:16 PM UTC-5, Don Redmond wrote: 
(snip) 
> 
> Just because they don't want to do it because its trivial hardly means they can't do it. 
> 

It is not trivial for physics just now is going to "use it to death". Yes, instead of chapters in Calculus books of the future, instead of chapters full of Line Integral, vector fields, Gaussian surface, instead of that crap. Those chapters will now be full of this generalization of the Quotient Rule, because Ohm's law is really not V = i*R but is rather, V = i*B*L where B is magnetic field, L is a form of angular momentum,  i is current, and V is voltage. 

So the Maxwell Equations of Old Physics becomes all permutations of V= i*B*L 

(V/i*B)' 

(V/i*L)' 

(V/B*L)' 

and 

(i*B*L)' 

Before, with V = iR, there was only V/i, V/R, iR, just 3 permutations, now there are 4 

And the extra term in each of those equations gives physics a Spin term, spin in atoms and elementary particles and in gravity. The reason that stars, galaxies, planets and other bodies have a spin term. 

So, trivial to the mathematician because they never used the generalized Quotient Rule, but utterly essential to the physicist, whose most important math equations in all of physics the EM theory, are based on that generalized Quotient Rule. 

> Let us use logarithmic differentiation. (This method will make it relatively easy to do as many factors in the numerator and denominator as you wish.) 
> 
> We have ln(f/gh) = lnf - lng - lnh. Thus by the chain rule 
> 
> ((f/gh)')/(f/gh) = f'/f - g'/g - h'/h. 
> 
> Thus 
> 
> (f/gh)' = (f/gh)(f'/f - g'/g - h'/h), 
> 
> which yields the result you obtained after some minor algebra involving common denominators. 
> 
> Of course, if your version of lnx does not possess these nice properties, then good luck. 
> 
> Don 

Thanks Don, tell me, does yours constitute a proof or as a example that conforms with the calculations. 

I make no bones about my example of using x^7/(x^2*x^3) to see if the numbers work out. 

I ran a test sample of x^7/(x^2*x^3) knowing the answer must be 2x. And my guess of the correct formula delivers 7x^6*x^5 - x^7*2*x^4 - x^9*3*x^2 divided by x^10. 

You use Ln. I used x^2 

But can one say your use of Ln is something more special than just my fast use of x^7 / x^2*x^3 

In other words, since the Limit concept is bogus, even though you cannot admit it bogus, we cannot say x^2 example is any sort of proof in general. So then, those in Old Math routinely ran to a Limit silly argument, like running in place, just to say to a gullible audience, this is a proof, because I cite Limits which is unintelligible limits for logic. But is a Ln example, then a proof, since Limit is not a proof? 

So, when Limits are just phony, yet a raw example like I used is just not general enough. Then, I suppose the example that Don puts out, is the better proof of what is (f/gh)'. 

And we get a taste of this in much of higher calculus, where the nerd seeks to run to the Limit for a proof, when in fact, that Limit argument is absurd, even to the math professor doing the Limit argument. For if the truth be known, perhaps every math professor feels his/her belly is full of butterflys as they do another Limit argument, feeling another preaching of absurdity. 

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#643716 — Re: Yes, yet again I have to re-do the Maxwell Equations Re: Lab results, today, highest reading was .08 V Re: what is m^2/(A*s) some angular momentum Re: AP-Ohm's law

reber G=emc^2	
4:34 PM (1 hour ago)


Can the Sun's plasma

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#642800 — Re: B in Ohm's law Re: Page21, 3-6, AP-Maxwell Equations of New Physics/ Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed

Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> babbleth:

>Alright, really nailing down some of these.

>The units A*s/m^2 or Coulombs per meter squared is called Displacement D, electric displacement

>So it looks good for the argument of Ohms law replacing R with B

>In V = iR

>We try V = B/D where i = 1/D

hehehehe....you do realize that electric displacement is just the electric
field (which you hate) multiplied by the permittivity...

Not that it matters, resistance has nothing to do with the B field, so have
fun barking up the wrong tree.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web