PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Theory and Learning Center > EM Theory > Displacement Current - Does it Exist?
2024-11-28, 03:47:49
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
Author Topic: Displacement Current - Does it Exist?  (Read 139873 times)
Topic Options img
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #125 on: 2010-12-05, 17:10:02 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 16:38:13
Rosemary:

An atomic magnetic dipole is an atom that has outer electrons that are in a fixed orbit.  That's in contrast to most atoms where the outer electrons are in a shell that will change orientation randomly.  When the outer electrons are in a fixed orbit then the atom itself is a small magnet, i.e.; an atomic magnetic dipole.  That's all a bar magnet is, a bunch of atoms with magnetic dipoles that are lined up.
MileHigh - IF there was an arbitrary interaction of electrons in any of their shells then our quantum physicists would not have been able to predict the range and type of atoms that exist.  Nothing arbitrary MileHigh.  The valence electrons in any atom can be moved in or out of that structure but that results in a valence imbalance.  But all those electrons - are expected to follow a predetermined path the only rule applied is that they never share a path with each other.  It's also fundamental to their thinking that they can say NOTHING about the movement of those electrons as a 'wave'.  And in their orbit around the nucleus - they're in a wave whether they're in the outer shells or anywhere at all within the atomic structure.

Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 16:38:13
Things like bar magnets can't last forever because of increasing entropy.  Slowly but surely some atoms fall out of the majority alignment.  That's why when you heat or bang a bar magnet it can loose some of it's magnetism.  That's what I was referring to in my original posting.
I can agree with this.

Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 16:38:13
There truly is no such thing as "North" and "South."  The magnetic lines of flux are vectors that have magnitude and direction so you can arbitrarily say that "North" is when the  vectors are pointing towards you and "South" is when the vectors are pointing away from you.  The key point is that the lines of flux travel in closed loops so there is no true "North" or "South" associated with a closed loop.
You're arguing my own point MileHigh.  Maybe one day you'll take the trouble to read my work.  But you can't 'outlaw' the terminology that is used to describe this.  And that's how convention has chosen to describe it.

Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 16:38:13
Take the example of a generator coil.  If a "North" pole passes by the coil, then that is indistinguishable from a "South" pole passing by the same coil.  All that you have to do is swap the output wires of the coil connected to your probe and then the waveform on your scope display will be identical.
But bear in mind.  The current flow changes.  And it changes in relation to that applied voltage.  It really doesn't matter what you call it.  But convention allows for that change whether or not you want to ascribe a charge property to it - or not.

Rosemary
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #126 on: 2010-12-05, 17:10:18 »
Group: Guest
Just a little comment about dielectrics and dipoles and all that stuff to stay on topic.  You slip a dielectric in between two capacitor plates and then you get increased capacitance.

Now I am just going to fly by the seat of my pants here and explore what is going on at the microscopic atomic level.  Each atom in each molecule in the dielectric has a positively charged nucleus and a negatively charged electron cloud.  When you charge up the capacitor you set up an electric field gradient inside the dielectric medium.

Each individual atom will become deformed under the influence of the electric field.  The positively charged nucleus will be pushed one way by the electric field and the negatively charged electron cloud will be pushed the opposite way.  However, the atom itself will oppose this deformation of its symmetry because of the same electrical attraction and repulsion forces at play within the atom itself.

In that sense, each individual atom is acting like a mechanical spring and storing the electrical energy that had to be expended to deform it in the first place.  In my view the deformed atoms (or molecules) are the "dipoles" and you can see how they are storing energy in the stress of the physical deformation.

There are many ways you can look at a capacitor and this is just one.  It's always good to keep a good "top level" view in mind by stating that the space between the capacitor plates has a volume, and therefore can store a certain amount of energy per unit volume.  When you put a dielectric into that space between the plates, you have basically added trillions of little energy-absorbing (and releasing) springs.  That results in a higher amount of energy that can be stored per unity volume, a.k.a. increased permittivity.

In other words, nothing too fancy here.  You can break it down to thinking of the dielectric as mechanical springs that are compressed by the electric field.

MileHigh
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #127 on: 2010-12-05, 17:40:56 »
Group: Guest
lol.  Sorry Poynty.  I though you were being earnest. 

Rosemary
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #128 on: 2010-12-05, 18:19:52 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
So, in the case of a vacuum capacitor, how is the energy stored in the vacuum dielectric?

Is the vacuum polarized?   

If you look at electric induction, when you bring an object with a positive charge near an uncharged object then the uncharged object gains a negative charge.  (I posted a page from an article on this several days ago.)  The negative charge does not come through "space" or a dielectric from one object to the other, the negative charge is produced by sourcing or sinking electrons at the other side of the circuit.

I'm now questioning the whole "energy is stored in the dielectric" school of thought.  I have heard of the test where you can charge a dielectric, remove the conductors and place new conductors on the dielectric and discharge the dielectric.  I have also heard of test that showed the previous test is invalid. 

I do not agree with the whole separated dipole explanation.  If I expend energy to separate the atomic dipole, haven't I just decreased the energy of this dipole?  So, the dipole and my charge imbalance are now balanced in the region of the dipole.  This is why it resist the flow of charges, and the more the dielectric material can balance the opposite charges of the conductors, the better dielectric it is. 

So, our stored energy is not in the dielectric, but the mechanism to keep the charges separated is, and the energy is stored in the separation of the charges, which will violently balance if allowed to.

One question remaining is are additional charges added/subtracted or do the existing charges increase/decrease?
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #129 on: 2010-12-05, 18:51:44 »
Group: Guest
Grumpy:

I am not sure if your questions are being addressed to me, but I will take a crack at a few things.

Quote
So, in the case of a vacuum capacitor, how is the energy stored in the vacuum dielectric?

Is the vacuum polarized?

I think sometimes you just have to accept things based on empirical evidence and I am sure that there is theory to back it up.  They have made measurements on the vacuum and have the measurements for the permittivity and permeability.  The vacuum is not polarized because there is nothing in it to polarize.

From Wikipedia:

Quote
The impedance of free space, Z0, is a physical constant relating the magnitudes of the electric and magnetic fields of electromagnetic radiation travelling through free space. That is, Z0 = |E|/|H|, where |E| is the electric field strength and |H| magnetic field strength.

The impedance of free space equals the product of the vacuum permeability or magnetic constant μ0 and the speed of light in a vacuum c; its value is approximately 376.73031 ohms; its numerical value is a defined constant because the numerical values of the magnetic constant and of the speed of light are fixed by the definitions of the ampere and the metre, respectively.

Quote
Sometimes c is used for the speed of waves in any material medium, and c0 for the speed of light in vacuum.[10] This subscripted notation, which is endorsed in official SI literature,[3] has the same form as other related constants: namely, μ0 for the vacuum permeability or magnetic constant, ε0 for the vacuum permittivity or electric constant, and Z0 for the impedance of free space. This article uses c exclusively for the speed of light in vacuum.

So it just "is" and if you want to go down the path of quantum physics I will assume that there are are theories and models to suggest why we ended up at 376 ohms.  I am just guessing that the information might be found there.

Quote
I do not agree with the whole separated dipole explanation.  If I expend energy to separate the atomic dipole, haven't I just decreased the energy of this dipole?  So, the dipole and my charge imbalance are now balanced in the region of the dipole.  This is why it resist the flow of charges, and the more the dielectric material can balance the opposite charges of the conductors, the better dielectric it is.

No, you increase the energy in each atomic dipole.  That atomic dipole is an electrical field dipole and that will work in the opposite direction of the electric field set up between the capacitor plates.  Therefore the atomic dipoles are both storing energy because of their spring-like electromechanical stress and counteracting the electric field between the plates.  Therefore for a constant amount of charge on the two plates, slipping a dielectric in between the two plates causes the voltage between the plates to go down.  Therefore you can add more charge to the plates to bring the voltage back up to the original voltage.  This stresses the atomic dipoles even more and so they are storing even more energy.  If you stress the dipoles too much electrons start to get stripped off of the atoms and current flows and the cap discharges because of dielectric breakdown.

The bottom line is if you deform an atom that normally has a spherical shape and turn it into an egg shape due to an external electric field, then by definition that atom is storing energy because you had to expend energy to deform it in the first place.  It's the spring analogy again.

You are deforming individual atoms but not necessarily physically deforming the dielectric itself.

Added:  There normally is no dipole, it's only under the influence of the electric field does the dipole come into being.

Anyway, I am just flying by the seat of my pants.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-12-05, 19:41:31 by MileHigh »
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #130 on: 2010-12-05, 19:00:32 »
Group: Guest
Anyway, that's why I think they call it "displacement current."  You are displacing the form of the atoms by moving the nuclei in one direction and the electron clouds in the opposite direction.  That implies a "current" flowing in the same direction for both the nuclei and the electron clouds.  It also implies that without any changing electric field with respect to time (dv/dt) then the displacement current is zero.  For a constant electric field strength, the egg-shape deformation of the atoms will not change.  The "eggs" only get displaced when the electric field is increasing or decreasing with respect to time.

As I have stated many times in the past, in the capacitor example the "displacement current" due to the deforming "eggs" in the dielectric is identical to real current flowing through the capacitor leads.  We also know that a changing electric field with respect to time will produce a changing magnetic field with respect to time, irregardless of whether we are talking about displacement current or not.  So it comes as no surprise that displacement current inside the dielectric medium of a capacitor results in a real measurable magnetic field.

Also, even if there are no atoms to deform or "displace" the base vacuum space has an associated permittivity and as a result by definition it has an inherent ability to store energy in the electric field that can occupy the volume of that space (or air at STP which has almost the same permittivity).  So a changing electric field in a vacuum can also represented by displacement current because energy is being stored in that space.

MileHigh
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #131 on: 2010-12-05, 20:09:04 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
The "dielectric dipole are displaced explanation" does not match with electrostatic induction.

In electrostatic induction, there is a current, but it is from the other side of the circuit.  A capacitor should not be any different.
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #132 on: 2010-12-05, 22:37:59 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010-12-05, 20:09:04
The "dielectric dipole are displaced explanation" does not match with electrostatic induction.

In electrostatic induction, there is a current, but it is from the other side of the circuit.  A capacitor should not be any different.

There is only a current if you move the charged object that you are holding closer or farther away from the (formerly) uncharged object.  You are implying that the uncharged object has a ground connection so that it can source or sink electrons.  If you don't move the object in your hand then no current flows.

So the two examples are quite similar.  When you move the charged object, the distance between the charged and the formerly uncharged object changes, and therefore the electric field strength changes.  One more time you are back to a changing electric field inducing a current flow in the formerly uncharged object, and therefore there is an equivalent displacement current in the empty space between the two objects.  That sounds pretty similar to me.

MileHigh
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #133 on: 2010-12-05, 23:28:25 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 22:37:59
There is only a current if you move the charged object that you are holding closer or farther away from the (formerly) uncharged object.  You are implying that the uncharged object has a ground connection so that it can source or sink electrons.  If you don't move the object in your hand then no current flows.

So the two examples are quite similar.  When you move the charged object, the distance between the charged and the formerly uncharged object changes, and therefore the electric field strength changes.  One more time you are back to a changing electric field inducing a current flow in the formerly uncharged object, and therefore there is an equivalent displacement current in the empty space between the two objects.  That sounds pretty similar to me.

MileHigh

I agree, except for the displacement between the two objects.
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #134 on: 2010-12-06, 03:59:45 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 17:10:18
Just a little comment about dielectrics and dipoles and all that stuff to stay on topic.  You slip a dielectric in between two capacitor plates and then you get increased capacitance.

Now I am just going to fly by the seat of my pants here and explore what is going on at the microscopic atomic level.  Each atom in each molecule in the dielectric has a positively charged nucleus and a negatively charged electron cloud.  When you charge up the capacitor you set up an electric field gradient inside the dielectric medium.

Each individual atom will become deformed under the influence of the electric field.  The positively charged nucleus will be pushed one way by the electric field and the negatively charged electron cloud will be pushed the opposite way.  However, the atom itself will oppose this deformation of its symmetry because of the same electrical attraction and repulsion forces at play within the atom itself.

In that sense, each individual atom is acting like a mechanical spring and storing the electrical energy that had to be expended to deform it in the first place.  In my view the deformed atoms (or molecules) are the "dipoles" and you can see how they are storing energy in the stress of the physical deformation.
I get it that you're comfortable with this image.  Which means that what I'm going to tell you should make you rather uncomfortable.  IF the electromagnetic force were able to reach into an atomic structure then we would be well able to dismantle our atoms - at ease.  There is absolutely NO SUCH THING as a spatial separation of the 'electron cloud' and the 'nucleus'.  They stick 'like crazy'.  The very best that our electromagnetic force can manage is to influence atoms that have an innate valence imbalance.  And then it is able to push or pull those atoms through space to vary the molecular or valence condition of the atoms.  But that's it.  And certainly - in the atoms that make up your average magnet - there is absolutely NO VARIATION TO THEIR VALENCE CONDITION.  And NOR does the electromagnetic force  introduce more or less electrons to those atoms via a charge current.  It can only work with what's on offer - what's actually in the environment or in the shared space of that atom and that electromagnetic force.  

Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-05, 17:10:18
There are many ways you can look at a capacitor and this is just one.  It's always good to keep a good "top level" view in mind by stating that the space between the capacitor plates has a volume, and therefore can store a certain amount of energy per unit volume.  When you put a dielectric into that space between the plates, you have basically added trillions of little energy-absorbing (and releasing) springs.  That results in a higher amount of energy that can be stored per unity volume, a.k.a. increased permittivity.

In other words, nothing too fancy here.  You can break it down to thinking of the dielectric as mechanical springs that are compressed by the electric field.
The air gap and the vacuum allow the passage of 'charge current'.  And this current can flow in either direction.  Therefore - in that sense - they're unpolarised.  The minute you introduce a dialectric - then you limit the directional flow of current.  This evidence therefore indicates that charge current has a polarised condition.  Nothing to do with more or less 'springs'.  All you've done is enabled current flow in one direction and prevented it in another direction.  And the more dielectric - then the more current that can be either enabled or prevented from flowing.  

Rosemary
corrected
« Last Edit: 2010-12-06, 05:07:48 by aetherevarising »
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #135 on: 2010-12-06, 04:38:21 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010-12-05, 18:19:52
So, in the case of a vacuum capacitor, how is the energy stored in the vacuum dielectric?

Is the vacuum polarized?  

If you look at electric induction, when you bring an object with a positive charge near an uncharged object then the uncharged object gains a negative charge.  (I posted a page from an article on this several days ago.)  The negative charge does not come through "space" or a dielectric from one object to the other, the negative charge is produced by sourcing or sinking electrons at the other side of the circuit.
Why?  Why is there an assumption that because 'charge' equalises through space is there any need to assume that this is sourced by 'electrons at the other side of the circuit'?  Why can it not just as well be that charge - being something other than electrons - also influences electrons to change their positions within various atomic and molecular structures.  Then you are looking at the 'effect' of charge and not the 'cause' of charge.  Then 'charge' the thing that moves through space and equalises the balance of 'charge' may be something extraneous to the atom.  Yet not evident.  Exactly as the forces are not evident.  I think we're all looking for that something - that property in the aether - that is absolutely NOT visible - or as WW put it - 'dark'.  The only thing that is known to be extant that is also 'dark' - never having been found - are the actual properties of the forces.  Then.  Assume that they're 'dark' because they're outside the range of our measuring equipment.  That means that they've either got to be too small or too fast or both - to be measured.  A whole world out there - but outside our detection - effectively the aether that makes up the vacuum.  THEN - it would mean that all that is visible and measurable in our world is being moved and altered and varied in space - as a result of the interaction of aether energies.  And if you assume that atomic energy levels also actually comprise magnetic fields - then you'd only need the aether to comprise magnetic fields to allow for those endless interactions.  We know that magnetic fields interact directly with other magnetic fields.  

I deleted a whole lot of this post as I think I'm drifting off topic.

Rosemary
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #136 on: 2010-12-06, 05:14:08 »
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

I can't make head or tail about what you are talking about, it's simply too overwhelming to think about commenting on all of it, so I won't say much.  I am not saying that everything I am saying is 100% correct, I would have to crack open the books and verify it all.  However, I firmly believe that what I am saying is fundamentally sound.  On the other hand, what you are saying is nearly 100% wrong, and makes very little sense.  If you are genuinely interested in capacitors and dielectrics and permittivity, then I suggest that you read up on the matter.  That's all I can say.

MileHigh
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #137 on: 2010-12-06, 05:55:09 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-06, 05:14:08
Rosemary:

I can't make head or tail about what you are talking about, it's simply too overwhelming to think about commenting on all of it, so I won't say much.  I am not saying that everything I am saying is 100% correct, I would have to crack open the books and verify it all.  However, I firmly believe that what I am saying is fundamentally sound.  On the other hand, what you are saying is nearly 100% wrong, and makes very little sense.  If you are genuinely interested in capacitors and dielectrics and permittivity, then I suggest that you read up on the matter.  That's all I can say.

MileHigh

MileHigh - you started off by telling me that there's no distinction between a north and south pole.  You then explained that a magnetic field results somehow from atomic dipoles.  You then explained that atoms become physically 'distorted' by an electromagnetic interaction.  I assure you that none of these concepts are supported by mainstream or by experimental evidence.  And then you tell me to read up on mainstream science?  Exactly why?  Isn't it you who perhaps should do so. 

And I believe I'm reasonably articulate.  If you can't understand what I write then I can improve on that.  I'ts correctible.  What I would suggest that you can't open your mind to what I'm saying.  That's probably not correctible. 

Rosemary 
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #138 on: 2010-12-06, 06:29:16 »
Group: Guest
And - may I add.  A capacitor does exactly the same thing as a battery.  It's able to hold charge - measured as a voltage imbalance.  And it can only expend that charge when there is a connection made between its terminals.  The question according to Maxwell is how that charge is transferred through the space in the capacitor.  He proposed the term displacement current.  I have no idea what is referred to here in this thread as displacement current.  I keep trying to get an answer.  But without having an answer I've proposed that we're talking about the 'gaps' in a capacitor that do nothing to 'halt' the flow of current.  And I've proposed how it is that the current can flow through that space - through a vacuum and indeed flow at all. 

But.  If displacement current is here referring to that extra energy that we all know is measured on a charged inductor - then I want to know more.  Because that would be exploitable energy.  So.  I want to know how this energy is then moved through space - not only through a capacitor - but anywhere at all.

And by extra energy I'm referring to this.  A careful analysis of the actual energy dissipated on our 'inductive resistors' shows that more energy is available or dissipated than the energy that is measured to be dissipated as heat.  By the same token we have more energy dissipated as heat than is measured to be delivered by the supply source.  I want to know if that difference in measured energy at the load compared to the energy measured as heat - may be what is referred to by Grumpy and Poynty and everyone as 'displacement current'.  Surely that much is CLEAR?  SO.  What is it that you DON'T understand.

Rosemary
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #139 on: 2010-12-06, 18:48:29 »
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

Sorry I said that I am not going to comment.  I have just one follow-up question for you from the discussion if you will permit me.

How does a permanent bar magnet work?  You indicated that what I said was incorrect so I would like to hear your views on the subject.

Thanks,

MileHigh
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #140 on: 2010-12-06, 23:01:24 »
Group: Guest
That's a loaded question MileHigh.  It's on a par with 'what is energy?'   Here's what I know.  No-one knows the property of a magnetic field - so how can one say 'what causes' a permanent field in a magnet.  In the same way no-one knows the properties of electric current flow.  No-one knows the properties of the strong nuclear force.  No-one knows what gravity is and no-one even knows what energy is.  All that anyone knows is the effect of the forces on material that can be measured.  That's it.  And frankly, until we've finally and empirically established the actual properties of any of these forces - then we're obliged to speculate.  Here's my point.  Mainstream's theories are contradictory.  And I've yet to find anything that I can identify with outside of mainstream theory.  So.  Your guess is as good as mine.  And this is hardly the place to expound on my thinking about the field. I have a 'take' on this.  But I suspect we all do and anyway.  It's off topic. 

But if you actually want to know what I think it is then I can point you to a couple of links if you PM me.

Rosemary
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #141 on: 2010-12-06, 23:28:30 »
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

Every now and then there are moments on these forums that absolutely blow my mind.  You have people that claim to be on the "cutting edge" and they poo-poo the "programmed 'classicists'" and it turns out they don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to their field of supposed "expertise."  One of the ones that always sticks in my mind is seeing how clueless and nearly helpless Aaron was when it came to electronics and the use of an oscilloscope when he tried to replicate your circuit after having been "doing electronics" for more than 10 years.  What a complete and utter farce that experience was.

You have written an alleged thesis of an allegedly new "magnetic model" and yet you can't explain anything about how a bar magnet works?

Here is a link from the Encyclopedia Britanica for "magnetic dipole:"

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/357033/magnetic-dipole

Quote
magnetic dipole, generally a tiny magnet of microscopic to subatomic dimensions, equivalent to a flow of electric charge  around a loop. Electrons circulating around atomic nuclei, electrons spinning on their axes, and rotating positively charged atomic nuclei all are magnetic dipoles. The sum of these effects may cancel so that a given type of  atom may not be a magnetic dipole. If they do not fully cancel, the atom is a permanent magnetic dipole, as are iron atoms. Many millions of iron atoms spontaneously locked into the same alignment to form a ferromagnetic domain also constitute a magnetic dipole. Magnetic compass needles and bar magnets are examples of macroscopic magnetic dipoles.

The strength of a magnetic dipole, called the magnetic dipole moment, may be thought of as a measure of a dipole’s ability to turn itself into alignment with a given external magnetic field. In a uniform magnetic field, the magnitude of the dipole moment is proportional to the maximum amount of torque on the dipole, which occurs when the dipole is at right angles to the magnetic field. The magnetic dipole moment, often simply called the magnetic moment, may be defined then as the maximum amount of torque caused by magnetic force on a dipole that arises per unit value of surrounding magnetic field in vacuum.

When a magnetic dipole is considered as a current loop, the magnitude of the dipole moment is proportional to the current multiplied by the size of the enclosed area. The direction of the dipole moment, which may be represented mathematically as a vector, is perpendicularly away from the side of the surface enclosed by the counterclockwise path of positive charge flow. Considering the current loop as a tiny magnet, this vector corresponds to the direction from the south to the north pole. When free to rotate, dipoles align themselves so that their moments point predominantly in the direction of the external magnetic field. Nuclear and electron magnetic moments are quantized, which means that they may be oriented in space at only certain discrete angles with respect to the direction of the external field.

Magnetic dipole moments have dimensions of current times area or energy divided by magnetic flux density. In the metre–kilogram– second–ampere and SI systems, the specific unit for dipole moment is ampere-square metre. In the centimetre–gram–second electromagnetic system, the unit is the erg (unit of energy) per gauss (unit of magnetic flux density). One thousand ergs per gauss equal one ampere-square metre. A convenient unit for the magnetic dipole moment of electrons is the Bohr magneton (equivalent to 9.27 × 10−24 ampere–square metre). A similar unit for magnetic moments of nuclei, protons, and neutrons is the nuclear magneton (equivalent to 5.051 × 10−27 ampere–square metre).

I'm absolutely done in this discussion with you and will not respond at all.

MileHigh
   
img  Loner
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #142 on: 2010-12-07, 03:00:33 »
Group: Guest
Wow, that is interesting.

I won't bother to show how many errors are in the "Quote", and I don't mean copying errors.  I went to the link given, and while the measured effects may be "Proven", that is also a description of "Theory" on the formation of these effects.  With a little "real-life" experimentation, the initial theory can easily be disproved.  This is not to say that the math isn't correct for the effects, but to say that the initial "Cause" or "Form" of energy IS NOT PROVEN.

To "Blindly" accept something, without actually checking it out for yourself, can be very revealing as to what one believes.  The only problem that this causes is if any part of the "Initial" parameters is incorrect, then you really are assuming that because the "Math" happens to work correctly, you must know what is happening.  Even Einstien admitted that error, so this has nothing to do with knowledge of a subject, but with lack of open mindedness to consider the possibilities.

A stupid story, from my early years.  Two people, one a sheep farmer, and one a scientist, drove by a field with a lot of freshly shorn sheep.  The farmer said, "Those sheep are freshly shorn."  The scientist said, "It looks that way, from this side."

In the above situation, who is correct?  The answer is "Both"!  The farmer, with his experience, can be 100% sure that he knows what has happened, as this is his area of "Expertise".  The scientist knows that "Effects" are inconclusive without ALL the data, or what you see and measure are of NO VALUE.  There is NO ONE who can say for sure that both sides of those sheep were shorn, without more data, even though the farmer could exactly figure it out, and the scientist could make assumptions from that.

Difficult point to get across, but I hope this gives an idea of what I think when people talk of absolutes, when the concept is still in the theory stage, especially when the "Data" being measured cannot be defined by itself.  Can anyone actually state they know which is "Cause" and which is "Effect"?   Anyone can calculate correct values, but what figures are you plugging in?  It ends up being back to the old situation of assuming that "If the math works, I am right..."  Tell that to Einstein.  Interesting field.  (Pun Intended...)


Here's a stupid question, as I am not sure this is "On-topic" or not.  (I wish I knew...)  The propagation of "Energy" on the "Extra" coil in a Tesla MT continues after the coils of wire.  (Proven?  Recorded data is available...)  What form of energy is this, and could this be related to "Displacement Current".  I am not talking 'RE" and Tesla made it clear as to the difference.  I have not heard/Read of the "Possibility" of a Magnetic field collapsing into a single wire and still maintaining the same rate of dV/dt that was in the coil.  IF that is true, what type of energy flow are we talking, as it certainly cannot be standard electron drift, especially as it's measured at pi/2*c speed?  Lots of questions.  No definitive answers that I can even test.  What do you think?  (That is addressed to all, if I may.)   The more I test the "Fringe" areas, the less I seem to know...  There certainly seems to be an energy flow that is "non-magnetic" in nature that still follows conductors, or am I missing the boat here?  (I realize that many don't even recognize the "Extra" coil's function.  If that's the case, just ignore me as an "unknowing" tinkerer.  From original descriptions this flow, in extreme circumstances, was seen on the outside of the coil.  Seems to be acceptable to consider that this "Current" could be related to "Displacement Current" in some way.  Seeing that I have never, personally, operated an MT at this power level, I cannot verify that observation, so this is very much in the "Theory" area for me.)
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #143 on: 2010-12-07, 03:54:16 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: Loner on 2010-12-07, 03:00:33
Here's a stupid question, as I am not sure this is "On-topic" or not.  (I wish I knew...)  The propagation of "Energy" on the "Extra" coil in a Tesla MT continues after the coils of wire.  (Proven?  Recorded data is available...)  What form of energy is this, and could this be related to "Displacement Current"?  I am not talking 'RE" and Tesla made it clear as to the difference. 

I have not heard/Read of the "Possibility" of a Magnetic field collapsing into a single wire and still maintaining the same rate of dV/dt that was in the coil.  If that is true, what type of energy flow are we talking, as it certainly cannot be standard electron drift, especially as it's measured at pi/2*c speed?  Lots of questions.  No definitive answers that I can even test.  What do you think?  (That is addressed to all, if I may.)   

The more I test the "Fringe" areas, the less I seem to know...  There certainly seems to be an energy flow that is "non-magnetic" in nature that still follows conductors, or am I missing the boat here?  (I realize that many don't even recognize the "Extra" coil's function.  If that's the case, just ignore me as an "unknowing" tinkerer.  From original descriptions this flow, in extreme circumstances, was seen on the outside of the coil.  Seems to be acceptable to consider that this "Current" could be related to "Displacement Current" in some way.  Seeing that I have never, personally, operated an MT at this power level, I cannot verify that observation, so this is very much in the "Theory" area for me.)

it's a moving electric field

To me, the entire concept of a "displacement current" is now grossly flawed, and Maxwell was not to clear about it in the first place.   The amount of charge that is communicated between a positively charged object and a grounded object only requires a changing electric field between the two.  A changing electric field is not necessarily accompanied by a conduction current.   By the way, Dollard's description of the field around the top terminal of a MT that is conductive, but non-ionic, sounds like an electric field to me.  If there is such a monstrous displacement current along the MT coil, then why doesn't Tesla ever mention this?  and not a single object attracted by such an enormous field...

I have found papers arguing both sides, to no end.  Seems physicist are still arguing about a changing magnetic field producing an electric field.  Latest development is that the electric field that accompanies a magnetic field is inducing the current.  Who would have thought?

So, back to the moving electric field, they can create an induction-like response without the characteristic magnetic field.   Any HV pulse coil produces a very strong time-dependent electric field.  Make it very fast and strange things happen.
   
img  poynt99
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #144 on: 2010-12-07, 04:03:20 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Who said that there is a monstrous DI associated with a MT ?

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #145 on: 2010-12-07, 04:32:15 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Loner
Quote
I won't bother to show how many errors are in the "Quote", and I don't mean copying errors.  I went to the link given, and while the measured effects may be "Proven", that is also a description of "Theory" on the formation of these effects.  With a little "real-life" experimentation, the initial theory can easily be disproved.  This is not to say that the math isn't correct for the effects, but to say that the initial "Cause" or "Form" of energy IS NOT PROVEN.

The first clue should have been the word "britannica", which is kind of like the sesame street of science. I prefer modern science journals and the classics such as the original works of Maxwell, Faraday, Ampere,Weber and Tesla.
Regards
AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #146 on: 2010-12-07, 04:56:04 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010-12-07, 04:03:20
Who said that there is a monstrous DI associated with a MT ?

.99

Eric Dollard: see attached

If you read the whole book: Condensed Intro to Tesla Transformers, Eric is talking about an electric wave, not a polarization of a dielectric as most consider "displacement current" to be.  I think the whole polarization explanation was applied later and stuck because it sounds good.

Hooper's "motional electric field" happens to have the same properties...

Anyway, electric fields are heap to create, cheap to maintain, and can be rotated or otherwise moved very quickly.  Output is proportional to rotation velocity and magnitude of your perpendicular force, being it a gravity field, a magnetic field, or something else.
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #147 on: 2010-12-07, 05:09:17 »
Group: Guest
Loner:

I don't see any major problems with the Britannica quote.  As far as the cause or form of energy being "not proven" goes, that's just the tired old "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" argument.  When you guys do all of your experiments with coils I don't hear any of those questions being raised.  It's only when you cite some known and established scientific knowledge that the argument surfaces.  What is an electric field?  What is a magnetic filed?  How come that isn't pondered every time the boys and girls talk about Tesla coils when they look for over unity?  We are just discussing the mechanism by which a permanent magnet works.

The simple fact is that all of us accept the fact that flowing current produces a magnetic field.  This is a directly observable phenomenon and it is very well understood.  Think hard drives.  In a bar magnet the flowing current comes from the electrons orbiting around certain atoms or molecules that possess a magnetic moment.

If you want to go "extreme nerd" about this issue, I found this link:

http://www.uni-due.de/physik/wende/keune/deutsch/nuclear-moments.pdf

AC:

It doesn't matter where you find this information.  You could easily find it in anything from a grade-six science book to the most advanced research papers pertaining to high-density magnetic storage.  I view your characterization of the Britannica link as being "the sesame street of science" as you starting to play your game again, slowly creeping up and trying to hide below the radar.  You could have chosen many other ways to describe the Britannica link instead of using that strange pejorative description.  Also in my life experience Encyclopedia Britannica has always been considered one of the better and more respected encyclopedias.  Plus as I argue above, the rational for your making that point is wrong anyways, we just talking about the well known and accepted way a bar magnet works.  My senses are tingling and I advise you to stop it right now.

MileHigh
   
img  aetherevarising
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #148 on: 2010-12-07, 05:29:10 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2010-12-06, 23:28:30
Rosemary:

Every now and then there are moments on these forums that absolutely blow my mind.  You have people that claim to be on the "cutting edge" and they poo-poo the "programmed 'classicists'" and it turns out they don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to their field of supposed "expertise."  One of the ones that always sticks in my mind is seeing how clueless and nearly helpless Aaron was when it came to electronics and the use of an oscilloscope when he tried to replicate your circuit after having been "doing electronics" for more than 10 years.  What a complete and utter farce that experience was.

You have written an alleged thesis of an allegedly new "magnetic model" and yet you can't explain anything about how a bar magnet works?

Here is a link from the Encyclopedia Britanica for "magnetic dipole:"

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/357033/magnetic-dipole

I'm absolutely done in this discussion with you and will not respond at all.

MileHigh

That was an interesting read.  Especially for me.  I've often wondered why you're that confused about everything.  Now I know.  It was also a relief to learn that there is - indeed - an atomic dipole.  It's any atom that's got an imbalanced valence condition.  And more to the point an iron atom doesn't even have to have a valence imbalance yet it is a dipole.  What a load of whatever.  LOL. And it appears that I was wrong.  An electron can indeed be considered a magnetic dipolar particle.  I'd give me eye teeth to know who wrote that 'dissertation'.  

I also see that you still haven't quite 'done' with this exercsie.  I lost my previous post by checking on your latest contribution.  I needn't have bothered.

Rosemary  

BTW - Here's my take on this kind of thinking.  Knock yourself out MileHigh. 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38315399/MORE-INCONVENIENT-TRUTHS
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? « Reply #149 on: 2010-12-07, 05:39:58 »
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

I am quite certain that I am not confused about most things, and now you know how a bar magnet works.  I am not really sure what you mean when you use the term "imbalanced valence condition" and I am pretty sure that's not what a typical magnetic moment for an atom or molecule is all about.

I note that you are citing yourself to back up your own arguments.  That's not going to work for me, nor would it work in academia.

Anyway, the discussion between the two of us about this topic is over.

MileHigh
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-28, 03:47:49