The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Magnets?  (Read 5089 times)

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« on: 11/08/2010 15:01:28 »
Suppose we had two magnets made of an exotic material that would allow them to pass through each other never touching except via the field of each. Each would be made in the shape of a washer or doughnut and ones diameter is several hundred times smaller than the other but the field strength of each is identical. If they are separated out in space by say by 20cm when released what would you suppose their final position with respect to each other would be?


 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #1 on: 11/08/2010 15:42:23 »
A few too many intangibles for me.  if they are tori (doughnuts or washers) and the smaller is 100 times smaller - could it not fit in the hole of the large.  Might not a good starting experiment, which could done in reality, be to create a system where this could be checked in only one degree of freedom.  I could visualize a rod fixed  (by its circular end) to a surface with a cylinder surrounding it - the smaller torus could go round the rod and the larger round the cylinder.  lubricate the rod, cylinder, and tori; and release.  removing the constraint of the the rod and cylinder would allow the magnets to twist and flip over, but I dont know what would happen without trying. 

materials that pass through one and another, yet are concrete, too hard to fathom.

Matthew
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #2 on: 11/08/2010 15:55:44 »
Hypothetically, if the electron and proton were a wave in the shape of a torus the proton would situate itself at the center of the electron torus. This would also suggest that the electron and proton are their own anti-particle, hypothetically speaking.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #3 on: 11/08/2010 16:32:49 »
But the electron is a lepton (a fundamental particle) and has its own ant-particle (positron) - the proton is a baryon (made up of quarks) and has antiproton.  electrons/leptons do not interact with the strong force; whereas protons/baryons must do.  lots of basic differences for a pair.  Matthew
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #4 on: 11/08/2010 17:29:37 »
Yes, the standard model teaches us exactly that picture. Does that mean we should never look at other possibilities. It has invented particles to fill the questions one should ask, gravity, charge, mass and inertia. The photon, for example, is not a particle. http://hypography.com/forums/strange-claims-forum/22596-photon-creation.html#post292773
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #5 on: 11/08/2010 17:40:03 »
Sorry Ron - cannot read your link, get flashing red screens warning me of potential malware.  I know what you mean about questioning orthodoxy and the dangers of not doing so; but some claims require such a leap of faith that I cannot give them proper consideration.  I am ashamed to say that I would probably have said the same about quantum mechanics had I been alive when the first ideas came to light.

Although the standard model has invented particles - this is one of its great strengths, as some of these have now been demonstrated in experiments.  So much has to be changed and the results of so many experiments discarded in order to accept this idea that I cannot see it being correct

Matthew

Matthew
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #6 on: 11/08/2010 19:14:36 »
Try this link,  http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=28667.0;topicseen
I don't think any experiments need to be discarded. We need to rethink our conclusions.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #7 on: 12/08/2010 16:22:53 »
How would you explain photonic momentum and angular momentum if the photon has no particle nature?  Radiation pressure can be shown experimentally.   
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #8 on: 22/02/2011 16:56:55 »
These are not true dipoles but they are as close as we can get. Each torus is painted only on the north pole side. The red one is considered to be the proton which I could not get any smaller. In reality it should be over eighteen hundred times smaller than the yellow electron. If you had an electron torus and a proton torus in free fall they would always center up from any angle. No matter what their starting orientation the north poles will all always win and it also shows they could be their own anti-particle. The video is here.
« Last Edit: 22/02/2011 16:59:10 by Ron Hughes »
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #9 on: 23/02/2011 18:22:11 »
Imat, did you read the link at which I pointed? There is no angular momentum for the photon other than mathematical. Photonic momentum is just the acceleration of a charged particle, the higher the acceleration the larger the momentum.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #10 on: 24/02/2011 12:12:26 »
Sorry Ron but there is definitely angular momentum for the photon - it can be transferred and measured experimentally.  I don't really understand your comment on momentum - photon possess a quality that we call momentum and we can measure it physically in the lab and have formulas for it (e^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4 p = h.ν/c)
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #11 on: 24/02/2011 17:02:20 »
There is only a perceived angular momentum due to the positive and negative edge of the photon. If you can't see that from this, http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=34333.0;topicseen , then we are on different pages.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #12 on: 24/02/2011 17:49:58 »
Sorry Ron - but I just think you are wrong, and posting a link to a page which you wrote and doesn't really consider angular momentum isn't gonna change my mind.  I will trawl for some evidence of my position
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #13 on: 25/02/2011 11:40:07 »
OK Ron here is a nice blog that describes a 1935 experiment concerning the transfer of the angular momentum of a circular polarized beam of light to a physical lump of matter - do you still assert that angular momentum is purely a mathematical conceit?

http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2010/04/measuring_the_angular_momentum.php
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #14 on: 25/02/2011 11:43:13 »
And here is a short historical piece about Nichols work to prove Maxwell's contention that radiation should create a reaction when it strikes a surface

http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/2002S/pressureoflight.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #15 on: 25/02/2011 18:11:50 »
OK Ron here is a nice blog that describes a 1935 experiment concerning the transfer of the angular momentum of a circular polarized beam of light to a physical lump of matter - do you still assert that angular momentum is purely a mathematical conceit?

http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2010/04/measuring_the_angular_momentum.php

That one was cool Imatfaal.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #16 on: 25/02/2011 18:53:32 »
OK Ron here is a nice blog that describes a 1935 experiment concerning the transfer of the angular momentum of a circular polarized beam of light to a physical lump of matter - do you still assert that angular momentum is purely a mathematical conceit?

http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2010/04/measuring_the_angular_momentum.php

That one was cool Imatfaal.


I should admit that I read it when it was posted in "another place" - and I was very taken with the great style and content.  I have actually ordered a copy of Prof Chad's book to see what it's like - I will report back
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #17 on: 25/02/2011 20:21:03 »
You said that proof based on the thread I did in new theories was not valid but the entire thread was based on the work of JJ Thompson and EM Purcell with no paper ever against their work. Others have shown that energy is transferred and appears to have angular momentum only because there is a large difference between where the charged particle's field was to where it is after acceleration.
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Magnets?
« Reply #18 on: 27/02/2011 02:09:50 »
Imat, a hypothetical experiment that is impossible. You have an electron out in space and your watching it. It has an electric field that has been expanding at c since it's creation. Now suppose you instantly move it one millimeter. You now have a single photon propagating away with only one transition. Of course it would have infinite energy but remember we are being hypothetical. Any experiment that measures angular momentum requires a continuous stream of these transitions being produced by exciting the electrons that provide them. Precessing of the wave caused by different electrons emitting photons would appear as angular momentum.
« Last Edit: 27/02/2011 02:25:06 by Ron Hughes »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Magnets?
« Reply #18 on: 27/02/2011 02:09:50 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums