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

Groups > sci.physics > #601212

Re: A minded physicist versus B mind //Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/16/2016 4:46 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 8:00:14 AM UTC-5, Anon Y. Mouse wrote:
>> On 10/16/2016 3:15 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Poor example. Magnets are dipoles so to any magnetic pole, every other
>> magnet in the universe has an attractive end and a repulsive end. If
>> that someone carried a box of positive electric charges to Maxwell, they
>> would always be in a situation where they were as far as possible from
>> each other due to repulsion.
>
> No, rather instead you have a very poor idea of physics, and thus this
> experiment must take place in order to shake up those with your like mind.

You are missing the point. Magnets are a poor example since they are 
dipoles, and each magnetic pole attracts one end of another magnet while 
repelling the other end. The attracted end gets closer while the other 
end gets further. Because of the inverse square law, now the attracted 
end is attracted *more* than the repelled end is repelled, so the other 
magnet as a whole gets attracted. So you get a clump of magnets. This is 
something every 10 year old boy who has played with magnets knows.

Do your experiment with a box full of positive charges. Tell me what 
happens.


> You have been through physics with too much of what I call *in class--idealizations*
>
> Take an ideal mass
>
> Take an ideal electric charge
>
> Take an ideal point of electricity on electron
>
> Take an idealized Space
>
> So, your understanding of physics is mostly in the setting of "ideal" when
> physics is never ideal.

I never mentioned ideal anything.
>
> So we need this type of experiment because it gets rid of those physics professors
> sitting on cloud nine munching away at a Danish roll and drinking coffee.
>
> Devise an experiment in which, you can get a Force of Repulsion with magnets.

Do it with charged objects, tell us the result. Hint: This has been 
something known for probably 200 years.

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

Thread

Preliminary page, Page21, 3-6, Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 00:15 -0700
  Re: Preliminary page, Page21, 3-6, Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy "Anon Y. Mouse" <nobody@home.invalid> - 2016-10-16 09:04 -0400
    A minded physicist versus B mind //Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 13:46 -0700
      Re: A minded physicist versus B mind //Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy "Anon Y. Mouse" <nobody@home.invalid> - 2016-10-17 00:16 -0400
        exclusion principle: no same space occupancy noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 10:09 -0700
    Re: Preliminary page, Page21, 3-6, Experiment proof that EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 14:58 +0200
  turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:14 -0700
    Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 20:16 -0700
      Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy "Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@alt.usenet.kooks.xxx> - 2016-10-17 07:34 +0200
        UIUC physics asking for more information Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart// Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 00:02 -0700
          Re: UIUC physics asking for more information Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart// noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 11:03 -0700
      Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 13:13 -0700
        Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 13:48 -0700
          Re: turning stupid physics professors into a bit more smart//EM is attraction force only, and any alleged repelling is denial of same space occupancy noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 14:58 -0700

csiph-web