Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #597500
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Someone in Old Physics trying to flesh out Faraday's law Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here |
| Date | 2016-09-18 22:31 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nrnm5o$130b$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <34f08e43-b8ca-46f8-8673-828eb384691a@googlegroups.com> <nrnf87$rc0$1@gioia.aioe.org> <e6fd4df3-5891-4ce9-862d-03958e6e4023@googlegroups.com> |
On 9/18/2016 10:03 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 at 8:33:03 PM UTC-5, Serigo wrote:
>
>>
>> nope, Maxwell-Faraday equation is => ∇ × E = -dB/dt
>>
>
> So, your saying the opposing Magnetic Field created by the newly
> minted current is all encapsulated by a negative sign.
>
> Do you actually believe that?
>
sign is only the direction to a frame of reference. right hand rule
3. Derivation of Third Law
Curl E = - DB/dt
“It is nothing but the differential form of Faraday’s law of
electromagnetic induction.”
According to Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, it is known
that e.m.f.induced in a closed loop is defined as negative rate of
change of magnetic flux i.e.,
e=–dθ/dt
where θ = magnetic flux
>>
>>> And one can immediately sense how wrong that is because it does
>>> not even give a opposing Magnetic Field to the changing magnetic
>>> field, as if a negative sign is sufficient to cover Lenz law.
minus sign is opposing mag field, Lenz Law, no problem here.
>>
>> no, that is the negative sign in Faraday's law of induction.
>>
>> Volt generated = -N (d BA)/dt see? no curl.
>>
>
> So now, what is the actual mathematics of the Thrusting in the
> thrusting bar magnet? What is that?
in terms of what? what is the setup, what do you want to know, are you
putting the bar magnet into a coil of wire ? the lines of magnetic flux
crosses the wires and induces electron flow in the wire.
Faraday's Law: Electric force due to a changing B-field
Main articles: Faraday's law and Magnetic flux
A changing magnetic field, such as a magnet moving through a conducting
coil, generates an electric field (and therefore tends to drive a
current in such a coil). This is known as Faraday's law and forms the
basis of many electrical generators and electric motors.
Mathematically, Faraday's law is:
E = − dB / d t
where E is the electromotive force (or EMF, the voltage generated around
a closed loop) and Φm is the magnetic flux—the product of the area times
the magnetic field normal to that area. (This definition of magnetic
flux is why B is often referred to as magnetic flux density.)[32]:210
The negative sign represents the fact that any current generated by a
changing magnetic field in a coil produces a magnetic field that opposes
the change in the magnetic field that induced it. This phenomenon is
known as Lenz's law.
This integral formulation of Faraday's law can be converted[nb 16] into
a differential form, which applies under slightly different conditions.
This form is covered as one of Maxwell's equations below.
no problems yet, you have equation now.
>
> Is that a velocity of Magnetic Field, or is it a acceleration of
> Magnetic Field. Or, is it even more than Magnetic Field but rather a
> acceleration of Magnetic Flux?
just change in magnetic field, as flux lines cross wire, accelleration
of mag field not needed.
>
> What do you think?
>
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 15:07 -0700
How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 17:25 -0700
Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-18 20:32 -0500
Magnetic Field in most-everything Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 19:38 -0700
Re: Magnetic Field in most-everything Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 15:51 +0000
people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 13:07 -0700
Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 16:15 -0500
Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 14:29 -0700
Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 19:51 -0500
Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 19:41 -0700
Re: Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 09:55 -0500
Re: Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-20 09:03 -0700
Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 22:26 +0000
This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 19:23 -0700
Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 21:41 -0500
(A*R)' = A'*R + R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1 + V*(R^-1)' Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 22:12 -0700
derivative of magnetic field Re: (A*R)' = A'*R + R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1 + V*(R^-1)' Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 23:45 -0700
Re: (A*R)' = A'*R + R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1 + V*(R^-1)' Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 10:09 -0500
Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-20 04:08 +0000
Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 10:28 -0500
Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-20 16:40 +0000
Someone in Old Physics trying to flesh out Faraday's law Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:03 -0700
Re: Someone in Old Physics trying to flesh out Faraday's law Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-18 22:31 -0500
Old Physics Faraday law math does not match the experiment Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:51 -0700
math that matches is the Product Rule in Differentiation that gives a Lenz law inside of Faraday law Re: Old Physics Faraday law math does not match the experiment Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 02:47 -0700
trying to teach a brainwashed that velocity on Magnetic Field is just another Magnetic Field Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:20 -0700
csiph-web