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

Groups > sci.physics > #600760

Law of Magnetism proves no magnetic monopole but also proves EM is a attract force only Re: ++Maxwell's actual differential equations

Show all headers | View raw

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 11:32:24 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Maxwell's actual Faraday law: F = u(vxH) - dA/dt - electric potential, compared to my Faraday law (V*R^-1)' = A*B  + V*B1^2 - V*B2^2
> 
> So let me start a new thread using what was at the end:
> 

Interesting to note equations with three terms to the rightside of equation


> 
> Here is a website that displays the Ohm's law as part of Maxwell Equations: 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Maxwell%27s_equations 
> 
> The eight original Maxwell's equations can be written in modern vector notation as follows: 
> (A) The law of total currents 
> J t o t = J + ∂ D ∂ t 
> 
> (B) The equation of magnetic force 
> μ H = ∇ × A 
> 
> (C) Ampère's circuital law 
> ∇ × H = J t o t 
> 
> (D) Electromotive force created by convection, induction, and by static electricity. (This is in effect the Lorentz force) 
> E = μ v × H − ∂ A ∂ t − ∇ ϕ 
> 

Interesting to note that the Lorentz force is the only three terms to the rightside of equation of Maxwell's eight equations.


> (E) The electric elasticity equation 
> E = 1 ε D 
> 
> (F) Ohm's law 
> E = 1 σ J 
> 
> (G) Gauss's law 
> ∇ ⋅ D = ρ 
> 
> (H) Equation of continuity 
> ∇ ⋅ J = − ∂ ρ ∂ t 
> 
> or 
> ∇ ⋅ J t o t = 0 
> 
> 

The Heaviside remake of the Maxwell Equations hides more than it uncovers and teaches.

> 
> Notation 
> H is the magnetizing field, which Maxwell called the magnetic intensity. 
> J is the current density (with Jtot being the total current including displacement current).[note 1] 
> D is the displacement field (called the electric displacement by Maxwell). 
> ρ is the free charge density (called the quantity of free electricity by Maxwell). 
> A is the magnetic potential (called the angular impulse by Maxwell). 
> E is called the electromotive force by Maxwell. The term electromotive force is nowadays used for voltage, but it is clear from the context that Maxwell's meaning corresponded more to the modern term electric field. 
> φ is the electric potential (which Maxwell also called electric potential). 
> σ is the electrical conductivity (Maxwell called the inverse of conductivity the specific resistance, what is now called the resistivity). 
> Equation D, with the μv × H term, is effectively the Lorentz force, similarly to equation (77) of his 1861 paper (see above). 
> When Maxwell derives the electromagnetic wave equation in his 1865 paper, he uses equation D to cater for electromagnetic induction rather than Faraday's law of induction which is used in modern textbooks. (Faraday's law itself does not appear among his equations.) However, Maxwell drops the μv × H term from equation D when he is deriving the electromagnetic wave equation, as he considers the situation only from the rest frame. 
> 
> Here is the website that attempts to show the Maxwell Equation without the Heaviside corruption: 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Dynamical_Theory_of_the_Electromagnetic_Field 
> 
> Equations of Electromotive Force. 
> P = μ ( γ d y d t − β d z d t ) − d F d t − d Ψ d x , 
> Q = μ ( α d z d t − γ d x d t ) − d G d t − d Ψ d y , 
> 
> R = μ ( β d x d t − α d y d t ) − d H d t − d Ψ d z . 
> } 
> 

Here we see that Maxwell had 3 terms to the rightside of equation, so the question is, why did not Maxwell include Lenz law as one of the three terms in Faraday's law.

Perhaps Maxwell understood Lenz law and realized it was one of the terms, but never discussed it in print. Sometimes when we understand something, we do not bother to explain our full understanding, and this may have been the case for Maxwell not discussing Lenz law.



> (D) 
> The first term on the right-hand side of each equation represents the electromotive force arising from the motion of the conductor itself. This electromotive force is perpendicular to the direction of motion and to the lines of magnetic force; and if a parallelogram be drawn whose sides represent in direction and magnitude the velocity of the conductor and the magnetic induction at that point of the field, then the area of the parallelogram will represent the electromotive force due to the motion of the conductor, and the direction of the force is perpendicular to the plane of the parallelogram. 
> The second term in each equation indicates the effect of changes in the position or strength of magnets or currents in the field. 
> The third term shows the effect of the electric potential It has no effect in causing a circulating current in a closed circuit. It indicates the existence of a force urging the electricity to or from certain definite points in the field. 
> 
> End quoting from Wikipedia on Maxwell Equations. 
> 
> Note: the origional Maxwell Equations have three terms on rightside, in full agreement with the AP-Maxwell Equations with 3 terms on rightside. 
> 
> AP

Now, I wonder if there could have been an experiment in the 1860s that Maxwell could have performed to convince him that EM has only a force of attraction and that the repulsion he thought he saw was not a force but was that of Pauli Exclusion Principle of "Denial of Same Space Occupancy".

Was there some sort of experiment that could have taken place in 1860 so that Maxwell would have proven EM is just attraction only?

Well, I suppose if someone or anyone carried a box of magnets to Maxwell Lab and tried to arrange them in any manner or fashion possible to arrange, that the magnets always come out in a configuration of "stuck together". And never a situation where the magnets repelled and further distanced themselves. Never was the case where you had magnets and they separated. Meaning: meaning that EM is attract only.

Now, let us ask, if EM has a force of repelling or repulsion, is that not a contradiction to the very idea that magnets are always dipole, and never monopole. Because if you had a repulsion force, then you must have a magnetic monopole because N and S only attract. And to have a monopole N to N means repel.

So, here, what I am saying is the Law of Magnetism itself proves there is no magnetic monopole and that there is no force of repulsion.

AP

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

++Maxwell's actual Faraday law: F = u(vxH) - dA/dt - electric potential, compared to my Faraday law (V*R^-1)' = A*B  + V*B1^2 - V*B2^2 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:32 -0700
  Law of Magnetism proves no magnetic monopole but also proves EM is a attract force only Re: ++Maxwell's actual differential equations Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 13:36 -0700
    Re: Law of Magnetism proves no magnetic monopole but also proves EM is a attract force only Re: ++Maxwell's actual differential equations Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 18:05 -0700
      Is Juno now lost?? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 12:32 -0700
        Re: Is Juno now lost?? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:25 -0700
          Preliminary page, Page20, 3-5, EM theory Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 22:37 -0700
            BOX Experiment proving EM is attract force only--Preliminary page, Page21, 3-6, EM theory Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 14:23 -0700
            Re: Preliminary page, Page20, 3-5, EM theory Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:36 -0700

csiph-web