You said earlier “The magnetic field is the electric field distorted (it is no longer isotropic) when seen by a moving charge”. You used the word “is” but our concept of a magnetic field is different to that of an electric field
Our concepts of electric and magnetic field are different, wrongly, for historical and also practical reasons. But they are exactly the same thing, and this is demonstrated by relativity :
"
the sources that create the field are at rest with respect to one of the reference frames. Given the electric field in the frame where the sources are at rest, one can ask: what is the electric field in some other frame?
Knowing the electric field at some point (in space and time) in the rest frame of the sources, and knowing the relative velocity of the two frames provided all the information needed to calculate the electric field at the same point in the other frame. In other words, the electric field in the other frame does not depend on the particular distribution of the source charges, only on the local value of the electric field in the first frame at that point. Thus, the electric field is a complete representation of the influence of the far-away charges. [...] That is, the magnetic field is simply the electric field, as seen in a moving coordinate system."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_electromagnetismFor more information and examples, see chapter 14-8 page 231 of
Paul Bickerstaff's course, especially § 14-8-1 where he finds by relativity the forces on parallel wires carrying currents.
But if whatever travels at velocity c from a charge is something that cannot be changed, then that is the deeper level that I am looking for. And that brings in the aether.
The idea of ether comes from the fact that we are talking about electromagnetic waves and that a wave needs a propagation medium, which determines its speed.
Is the limiting speed c related to this ether? As this speed is a limit to everything, including the transmission of information or gravity, I think that it goes far beyond electromagnetic waves, which removes one of the reasons for wanting an ether for the propagation of electromagnetic waves.
If I send in space, at any speed, a spring with an oscillating mass at each end, I observe an oscillation, I can define a wavelength and thus see it as a wave, and yet this object which looks like a wave is not one. A photon traveling in space could be of this model, thus not requiring an ether.
I am not closed to the idea of ether, we know that the quantum vacuum is not really empty, but I do not see any convincing demonstration of its necessity for a field.
Not here where we are talking about an electron sized coil around an electron. But I can simulate an array of tiny coils in FEMM to see how they produce a field external...
I do not doubt that the simulation gives consistent results. What worries me is the order of magnitude of the current in the small coils.
Have you calculated the current in a loop of the electron radius, capable of generating the same magnetic moment as the spin? The result could invalidate the loop hypothesis, for example if the speed of the charge were to be greater than the speed of light.
A magnetic moment creates a magnetic field and you have said that a magnetic field requires relative motion. Now you are saying the magnetic field from electron spin doesn’t require motion. You can’t have it both ways.
The magnetic moment does not create anything, it characterizes the intensity of the magnetic field.
And I have already answered: these notions depend on the context.
If we talk about spin as a quantum object, we do not talk about the speed of rotation of a charge, a spin is not a classical rotation although it has a magnetic moment.
If we talk about current loops, then by definition of what a current is, there is motion.
Why would you want an element of reality to be represented by only one model, the classical model?
We are talking about a single electron having a magnetic moment hence creating a magnetic field. Your “not unique” solution is for multiple charges.
The "not unique" solution is not specific to multiple charges. In the case of the magnetic field, it implies only the currents; that is to say that the knowledge of a magnetic or electric field in space does not allow, in a unique way, to calculate the intensity nor the configuration of the charges or currents which could give rise to it, thus even less the charge or the chargeS at the origin of the current. There are theoretically an infinite number of possible paths and current intensities to create any magnetic field, including the spin field.
I thought the angular velocity of spin was well known in terms of Planck’s constant.
A spin is not a classical rotation. If it is, please tell us which charge is rotating at which angular velocity and on which trajectory.
Irrespective of our different viewpoints I think we agree that a bunch of electrons in a region of space (like an electrode surface) having their spins aligned will create a magnetic field. And if the number quantity of those electrons changes then so does the field. And that change could induce voltage into a coil through which some of the field passes which in turn can pass through a load resistance to deliver power. Since the driving force changing the electron quantity is dominantly electric (like charging a capacitor) CoE demands that the electric drive should supply that power.
I agree
But the feed back from the load current is magnetic, and examination of that field indicates that its electric inducement into the capacitor charging circuit is not of the correct phase to account for that electrical loading effect. As you say it needs an experiment to find out. Unfortunately doing various sums around this problem I think the experiment needs electrolytic super capacitor technology to get anywhere. The capacities associated with the Coler Fe rods are not enough to account for the results there.
Whether the feed back is magnetic or electric makes no difference, it is electric in all cases for the reason of relativity said above. Consequently between source and load, all the effects of voltages and currents are always reciprocal.
Imho if free energy were to emerge from classical electromagnetic setups, no matter how they are twisted, it would have been done long ago. I am therefore researching where it is less explored, at least in the field of energy, with spin currents. They can be produced at the interface of ferromagnetic/non-ferromagnetic metals, as we have at Coler, and spin currents can create forces on conduction electrons. All this is complex and I am just starting out.