What is your EM crankosity?
in [Relativity]
|
From: doug on 22 Sep 2009 20:39 blackhead wrote: > On 22 Sep, 02:43, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > >>susan wrote: >> >>>"Benj" <bjac...(a)iwaynet.net> wrote in message >>>news:5e383309-0232-4441-9a7e-81e9c752d378(a)f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com... >> >>>>Are you a Maxwell loon? >>>>How well do you understand Maxwell's equations? >>>>Ten easy questions to measure your kookosity: >> >>>>1. An electromagnetic plane wave in free vacuum consists of a >>>>sinusoidal electric >>>>field and a sinusoidal magnetic field at right angles to it. These >>>>fields are delayed >>>>90 degrees from one another such that energy oscillates between them >>>>in a >>>>manner similar to an LRC circuit where the energy oscillates back and >>>>forth >>>>between capacitor storage and inductor storage. (true, false?) >> >>>false - no R component in EM in free vacuum. >> >>>>2. A magnetic field changing strength in time causes an electric field >>>>in space that is >>>>capable of producing currents in conductors. The process is called >>>>"induction" >>>>and is described by Faraday's Law. (true, false?) >> >>>close, not exact >> >>>>3. If a conducting circuit that encloses an area under a uniform >>>>magnetic field that >>>>totally covers the loop is changed in shape to enclose a different >>>>amount of >>>>magnetic flux, an emf will always be induced in the circuit due to the >>>>changed >>>>amount of flux. (true, false?) >> >>>mostly true, as wire crosses lines of flux >> >>>>4. When instruments measuring E and B (electric and magnetic fields) >>>>that are >>>>stationary with respect to those fields are placed on a moving >>>>reference frame >>>>moving with constant velocity with respect to the fields, by >>>>relativity, the meters >>>>always show the same values regardless of the magnitude of the >>>>(constant) >>>>velocity of the frame so long as the velocity of the moving frame is >>>>much slower >>>>than the speed of light. (true, false?) >> >>>there is an error term. >> >>>>5. For a point charge moving with a non-relativistic constant velocity >>>>(not >>>>accelerating) past an observer, the electric field from that charge >>>>will be observed >>>>to be the same spherical distribution found in electrostatics for a >>>>non-moving >>>>charge. (true, false) >> >>>there is an error term >> >>>>6. According to Maxwell's Equations a time-changing electric field as >>>>in a charging >>>>or discharging capacitor creates a displacement current through that >>>>capacitor and >>>>that displacement current creates a magnetic field just as if the >>>>capacitor were not >>>>there and a wire carrying the current was producing the field. (true, >>>>false?) >> >>>how can you discharge a capacitor with it not being there? >> >>>>7. It can be shown that if a line charge segment is moving past you as >>>>an observer at >>>>some constant velocity, that not only does the apparent length of the >>>>segment >>>>change to the viewer, but by Lorentz contraction at relativistic >>>>speeds the actual >>>>length of the line charge segment changes as well. (true, false?) >> >>>trivial >> >>>>8. It is well known through experiment and observations that >>>>electromagnetic waves >>>>as predicted by Maxwell's Equations form a spectrum depending on >>>>frequency >>>>that runs without other changes from low frequency radio waves, up >>>>through >>>>microwaves, on up to sub-millimeter waves, thence to Infrared light, >>>>then visible >>>>light, ultraviolet light and on up into X-rays and cosmic rays. >>>>(true. false) >> >>>cosmic rays are various particals, not EM >> >>>>9. All electromagnetic clocks slow by the same amount as their frame >>>>velocity >>>>reaches significant relativistic speeds leading to the conclusion that >>>>by relativity, a >>>>"dilatation" of time takes place that affects all electromagnetic >>>>events and even >>>>including biological ones. (true , false?) >> >>>how can one clock effect all time? >> >>>>10. Electromagnetic waves as described by Maxwell's Equations, >>>>propagate through >>>>the vacuum of empty space by relationships observed from those >>>>equations that a >>>>changing electric field creates a magnetic field and a changing >>>>magnetic field >>>>creates an electric field. These waves are unique in that they do not >>>>require a >>>>medium to propagate in. (true, false?) >> >>>trivial, look at the equations. >> >>Be careful, you are dealing with Benj. He is a crank with >>an agenda. He does not know any science but he thinks >>he do do clever things. He is also a fool. > > > Benj knows quite a bit about science and more than you, going by the > evidence so far. That is proof you are very ignorant of science. It would be a good idea for you to attend some science classes as well. > > >>>>======================= >> >>>>Hey, Uncle Al, this test's for you! Show us your stuff now so we >>>>won't have to call you "idiot"!- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > >
From: blackhead on 22 Sep 2009 19:50 On 22 Sep, 01:22, Benj <bjac...(a)iwaynet.net> wrote: > Are you a Maxwell loon? > How well do you understand Maxwell's equations? > Ten easy questions to measure your kookosity: > > 1. An electromagnetic plane wave in free vacuum consists of a > sinusoidal electric > field and a sinusoidal magnetic field at right angles to it. These > fields are delayed > 90 degrees from one another such that energy oscillates between them > in a > manner similar to an LRC circuit where the energy oscillates back and > forth > between capacitor storage and inductor storage. (true, false?) Partly true. E and B are always at right angles, but don't exchange energy with one another as they propagate. > 2. A magnetic field changing strength in time causes an electric field > in space that is > capable of producing currents in conductors. The process is called > "induction" > and is described by Faraday's Law. (true, false?) Indirectly true. An electric field, as well as being created by static charge, is also created by moving charge, including that moving at constant velocity. > 3. If a conducting circuit that encloses an area under a uniform > magnetic field that > totally covers the loop is changed in shape to enclose a different > amount of > magnetic flux, an emf will always be induced in the circuit due to the > changed > amount of flux. (true, false?) Indirectly true. It's directly the magnetic part of the Lorentz force acting on the electrons as they move through B, given by F_B = eVxB. > 4. When instruments measuring E and B (electric and magnetic fields) > that are > stationary with respect to those fields are placed on a moving > reference frame > moving with constant velocity with respect to the fields, by > relativity, the meters > always show the same values regardless of the magnitude of the > (constant) > velocity of the frame so long as the velocity of the moving frame is > much slower > than the speed of light. (true, false?) False. E and B depend upon Q so small v effects are magnified by large numbers of electrons, as in a typical piece of wire. > 5. For a point charge moving with a non-relativistic constant velocity > (not > accelerating) past an observer, the electric field from that charge > will be observed > to be the same spherical distribution found in electrostatics for a > non-moving > charge. (true, false) True. > 6. According to Maxwell's Equations a time-changing electric field as > in a charging > or discharging capacitor creates a displacement current through that > capacitor and > that displacement current creates a magnetic field just as if the > capacitor were not > there and a wire carrying the current was producing the field. (true, > false?) False. Displacement current is a mathematical definition, with the above interpretation being outdated. Only moving charge creates a magnetic field. > 7. It can be shown that if a line charge segment is moving past you as > an observer at > some constant velocity, that not only does the apparent length of the > segment > change to the viewer, but by Lorentz contraction at relativistic > speeds the actual > length of the line charge segment changes as well. (true, false?) True, meaning the charge density increases. > 8. It is well known through experiment and observations that > electromagnetic waves > as predicted by Maxwell's Equations form a spectrum depending on > frequency > that runs without other changes from low frequency radio waves, up > through > microwaves, on up to sub-millimeter waves, thence to Infrared light, > then visible > light, ultraviolet light and on up into X-rays and cosmic rays. > (true. false) True. > 9. All electromagnetic clocks slow by the same amount as their frame > velocity > reaches significant relativistic speeds leading to the conclusion that > by relativity, a > "dilatation" of time takes place that affects all electromagnetic > events and even > including biological ones. (true , false?) True > 10. Electromagnetic waves as described by Maxwell's Equations, > propagate through > the vacuum of empty space by relationships observed from those > equations that a > changing electric field creates a magnetic field and a changing > magnetic field > creates an electric field. These waves are unique in that they do not > require a > medium to propagate in. (true, false?) They don't need a medium to propagate through, although they do need charge to initiate propagation. Neither field causes the other, they propagate independently from the source at right angles to one another. > ======================= > > Hey, Uncle Al, this test's for you! Show us your stuff now so we > won't have to call you "idiot"!
From: Sam Wormley on 22 Sep 2009 20:27 blackhead wrote: > > Benj knows quite a bit about science and more than you, going by the > evidence so far. > <laughing>
From: Sam Wormley on 22 Sep 2009 20:43 blackhead wrote: > > They don't need a medium to propagate through, although they do need > charge to initiate propagation. Neither field causes the other, they > propagate independently from the source at right angles to one > another. > ??
From: Don Kelly on 22 Sep 2009 23:40
"Benj" <bjacoby(a)iwaynet.net> wrote in message news:f88ee515-ebf5-4c66-8dc9-7aec90f0b2f5(a)a6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... On Sep 22, 12:43 am, "Don Kelly" <d...(a)shawcross.ca> wrote: > "susan" <inva...(a)invalid.com> wrote in message > > trivial, look at the equations. > ----- > Good on you , Susan- you have again shown that you are one sharp cookie. Hey Don, what are your answers? Unlike Susan, carefully read the questions (words actually have meanings) and answer "true" or "false" for each one. Good luck! Waddya think? Is Susan saying the answer to # 10. is "Trivial true" or "Trivial false"? Saying that the answer to something is easy, is not the same as actually giving an answer. And it's the same non-answer she gave for # 7. --------- I guess it is trivial whatever you wish it to be. Quite frankly, I don't care and am not about to brush up on my EM theory (which I haven't touched in depth for many years ). I have more respect for the depth of Susan's knowledge than for yours. This is based on your posts and on hers-between them, hers consistently show more sense and a better real understanding (and common sense). I think that you have had a great deal of "exposure" to EM theory and do question things- but setting up questions which may or may not be valid- in what appears to be an attempt at self aggrandizement - is a fool's game. So is paranoia. Do I think that modern physics has all the answers? No, but questions are being asked and alternatives tested. Do I think that you have a better understanding? No, but you ask questions - whether or not you want answers or testing is not apparent. Do I think that Gaby and those he cites have "any" of the answers? Definitely not. Excreta taurii cerebrum vincit. -- Don Kelly dhky(a)shawcross.ca remove the x to reply |