Post by: pasala on 20/11/2022 13:31:23
As per General relativity, “matter tells space time how to curve and curved space time tells matter how to move”.
In my view, Einstein laid the foundation of modern theory of Aether through General relativity.
Ok, let us presume that we have placed huge mass such as Earth at its place. Space time is not empty it is completely filled with aether. In fact there is no place for Earth. It has to make room or place in aether and pushes aside Aether particles. It is like a pebble in water pond. There is no place for pebble in water, it pushes aside water particles and makes its own place. It clearly tells us that:
01 Aether is elastic, smooth can be pulled and pushed.
02 Present thinking that Earth’s movement is ride on aether is wrong.
03 Earth dip or immerse in aether, clearly tells that it is not rigid.
04 Michelson-Morley experiment is true only when Earth’s movement is a ride on ether.
How curved space tells mass to move:
Luminiferous aether or ether was the postulated medium for the propagation of light. It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do.
As per New Aether:
01 It is not light bearing, but light causing aether.
02 There is no separate medium to transport light waves.
Ok, suppose certain amount of energy is released from Sun due to nuclear fission. Please remember that space is completely filled with aether. As said by Descartes, there is no place for new particle in the space it can only move to the place as vacated by other particle. In turn it creates pressure on the existing aether particles. Suppose “X” particle is released from an atom of Sun, it cannot go directly. It only creates pressure / force on the immediate particle. This chain reaction continues till the last particle tagged to it on Earth reacts.
So, moving particles creates wave like impact on the curved space of Earth. A part of the impact is also passed on to the Earth. Particles in the curved space gets momentum. In turn it drags the Earth.
This is the way curved space tells mass how to move.
Please share your ideas / views to improve this.
Post by: Origin on 20/11/2022 13:52:28
Post by: pasala on 20/11/2022 14:01:21
You have made a series of assertions without any evidence backing up those assertions. An assertion made without evidence can be dismissed.ok, thank you. surely it is assertion, but based on G R. In future I will try to avoid them.
Post by: Colin2B on 21/11/2022 19:45:50
According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable;"That is incorrect, GR (and SR) work without assuming the existence of an ether.
Can you please describe an experiment that can detect the ether.
Post by: paul cotter on 22/11/2022 15:10:05
Post by: alancalverd on 23/11/2022 00:07:27
Post by: paul cotter on 23/11/2022 08:56:34
Post by: pasala on 27/11/2022 04:59:27
Well that is true. When GR was introduced, Lorentz wrote a letter to Einstein, with GR you have reintroduced Aether. In his reply Einstein did not ruled out, but said that it is "New aether". Mine assertion is based on that only.According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable;"That is incorrect, GR (and SR) work without assuming the existence of an ether.
Can you please describe an experiment that can detect the ether.
Suppose if we assume that there is aether throughout the universe. Present thinking is that, Earth's movement is a ride on aether. As assumed by General relativity mass curves or distorts space time around it. So, if aether is present, mass distorts it. We are assuming it as space fabric, but it is not clear what this fabric is. So, I had taken this aether.
If Earth's movement is a ride on ether, than Michelson Morley experiment is correct. In case, if mass dips in ether, it is different thing and Michelson Morley experiment is completely wrong.
Well mine knowledge is limited, help me out to improve this.
Post by: pasala on 27/11/2022 05:00:40
The existence or nonexistence of God is similarly unprovable. However, on the basis of causality and most certainly NOT religious faith, I strongly believe there is an intelligence behind the creation/operation of this universe, call it what you may.You are correct. But in my view, ether was buried alive.
Post by: pasala on 27/11/2022 05:05:35
The disproof is that, whatever properties you assign to it turn out to be inconsistent with experiment. Same as God.Yeah, it is very difficult to prove it. Yet i am making simple attempt. Have you read Maxwell, "physical lines of force". Directly or indirectly ether is present in it.
Post by: Bored chemist on 27/11/2022 09:09:04
But it doesn't tell you anything about physics.
If you name "lines of force" as "Aether" then you can say the aether exists.
But it doesn't tell you anything about physics.
Post by: pasala on 27/11/2022 13:49:24
If you name your pet cat as "Aether" then you can say the aether exists.
But it doesn't tell you anything about physics.
If you name "lines of force" as "Aether" then you can say the aether exists.
But it doesn't tell you anything about physics.
Ok, the speed of light in vacuum is 299,792,458 metres per second. By creating vacuum, we are taking away different particles, that are present in the air. Basic idea of aether is that, light waves needs a medium to propagate.
Since light travels with maximum speed in vacuum, we came to a conclusion that light needs no medium. Does this particles present in air aiding light. Actually, an atom absorbs a photon and releases electrons.
In other words we are only removing obstacles. Naturally, light travels with maximum speed as there are no obstacles.
It is incorrect, if we say that, by creating vacuum, we are taking away or removing the aether or the medium that is aiding or helping in propagation of light.
In specific terms, we don't know what exactly this aether is?. Light is having an important quality of particle, wave duality. Ok, suppose, let us assume that, by creating vacuum we have removed particles that are aiding light. In fact, I don't think we are having that much technology, if that is true, world might be in different shape. In such case, it is different vacuum.
As per de broglie hypothesis, all matter exhibits the quality of wave nature. That is true. But see the difference, as long as the electrons are in a cable, wave like quality is very limited. If so, there is no need for any electric bulb. It is only after coming out into space, they exhibits wave like quality.
I am not finding fault with de broglie hypothesis. It is perfectly correct. But its application is far limited. When a cable is charged, there is no light, it is only when they are sent through bulb, electrons exhibits wave like quality.
Electric bulb, mechanical devise used by us to create light. Here there are two parts:
01 Electric bulb
02 Light
As long as the electrons are spread in electric bulb, their wave nature is far limited. It is only after coming out into space, they exhibits real wave nature.
Notice the difference. There is something in the space that is aiding or improving the wave nature of particles.
It clearly tells us that aether is not a medium that is aiding in propagation of light, but it is a part of light. It is aiding in the "wave nature of light". In its absence, as assumed by de broglie, particles can show or exhibit original wave quality, which is insufficient to give you any light.
Please help me in this process.
Post by: Bored chemist on 27/11/2022 17:57:41
In specific terms, we don't know what exactly this aether is?In practical terms, it is imaginary.
Post by: Origin on 28/11/2022 16:51:22
Ok, the speed of light in vacuum is 299,792,458 metres per second. By creating vacuum, we are taking away different particles, that are present in the air. Basic idea of aether is that, light waves needs a medium to propagate.Correct.
Since light travels with maximum speed in vacuum, we came to a conclusion that light needs no medium.That is incorrect. The idea was that a luminous ether exists in a vacuum. Subsequent theory and experimentation have shown that there is no ether and that EM wave do not propagate through a medium, so the idea of an ether was abandoned.
Does this particles present in air aiding light.That sentence does not make any sense.
Actually, an atom absorbs a photon and releases electrons.That is not correct as a general statement. Typically if light is absorbed by an electron in an atom the electron will jump to a higher energy state - it will not be ejected from the atom. If the incident photon has a high enough energy and is absorbed by an electron, the electron can be ejected from the atom.
In other words we are only removing obstacles. Naturally, light travels with maximum speed as there are no obstacles.Correct light moves at the max speed, c, in a vacuum.
It is incorrect, if we say that, by creating vacuum, we are taking away or removing the aether or the medium that is aiding or helping in propagation of light.That is correct, it would be wrong to talk about a medium or ether when talking about the propagation of EM radiation.
In specific terms, we don't know what exactly this aether is?We know exactly what the aether is. It is a hypothesized medium that light propagates through. The aether was hypothesized to have the properties of being incredibly dense and rigid and at the same time being undetectable. We also know that this hypothesis is wrong since it has been falsified.
Post by: pasala on 04/12/2022 05:29:54
General relativity uses the word "space fabric". What this space fabric is. Suppose if space is empty, how this fabric came into existence. What does this fabric consists. Huge masses warps the space fabric around them. See, Gravity is also distortion of space time. So, clearly, it gives an idea that there is something in the space, whatever name we assign to it.
In fact GR is a great idea from a great mind. Yet, as said by Lorentz, there is ether and it is referred indirectly.
Post by: Bored chemist on 04/12/2022 10:55:32
Some of the great scientists such as Lorentz failed to get any result.No.
They got a result.
The result was "there is no ether".
Post by: pasala on 04/12/2022 15:06:21
It he had so, science will be in different shape.Some of the great scientists such as Lorentz failed to get any result.No.
They got a result.
The result was "there is no ether".
Post by: pasala on 04/12/2022 15:15:58
Descartes has got a big doubt, how these magnets identify a like and unlike poles. He assumed that there is an invisible field with which these magnets are interacting and identifying it.
This is not a feature or quality of magnets.
Space is not empty and it is completely filled with particles. It is completely wrong to say that magnet creates its field.
As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet, like ordinary matter, it has to create its own. It pushes ether particles in the space. Due to attraction, more particles are attracted towards the magnet. So, it results in magnetic field.
Magnet = magnetic field (draws particles from space).
So, it clearly tells us that, ether or Luminiferous ether or light bearing ether is not hardest substance like steel. Further it also clearly tells us that there is direct relationship between magnet and aether.
Attraction of particles towards magnet clearly tells us that ether is spread every where in the space. It also gives us an idea that ether is not a separate substance or medium.
Magnetic field clearly tells us that ether consists of particles only.
As assumed by Lorentz, the condition of this aether at a place can be described by the electric field E and the magnetic field H, where these fields represent the "states" of the aether, with no further specification, related to the charges of the electrons.
Ok, if we move the magnet, its field is not lost. It clearly tells us that ether is so dense that it is very difficult to separate them.
However if we move the magnet at the speed of light, its field is lost. At that speed, it is very difficult for particles in the space to join magnet.
I think, this is the first test for “New ether”. As said by Einstein, old ether theory is incompatible with modern science.
Post by: Bored chemist on 04/12/2022 16:09:10
As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet,I don't know what Descartes assumed, but there is a place for a magnet.
For example, there's one on my fridge.
It he had so, science will be in different shape.That's nonsense, all the experiments showed that the ether wasn't there.
Post by: Origin on 04/12/2022 16:28:41
Descartes has got a big doubt, how these magnets identify a like and unlike poles. He assumed that there is an invisible field with which these magnets are interacting and identifying it.This is all just a bunch of conjectures that is counter to all evidence and experimentation. Making stuff up that is not supported by the evidence is not science, it is pseudoscience.
This is not a feature or quality of magnets.
Space is not empty and it is completely filled with particles. It is completely wrong to say that magnet creates its field.
As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet, like ordinary matter, it has to create its own. It pushes ether particles in the space. Due to attraction, more particles are attracted towards the magnet. So, it results in magnetic field.
Magnet = magnetic field (draws particles from space).
So, it clearly tells us that, ether or Luminiferous ether or light bearing ether is not hardest substance like steel. Further it also clearly tells us that there is direct relationship between magnet and aether.
Attraction of particles towards magnet clearly tells us that ether is spread every where in the space. It also gives us an idea that ether is not a separate substance or medium.
Magnetic field clearly tells us that ether consists of particles only.
As assumed by Lorentz, the condition of this aether at a place can be described by the electric field E and the magnetic field H, where these fields represent the "states" of the aether, with no further specification, related to the charges of the electrons.
Ok, if we move the magnet, its field is not lost. It clearly tells us that ether is so dense that it is very difficult to separate them.
However if we move the magnet at the speed of light, its field is lost. At that speed, it is very difficult for particles in the space to join magnet.
Post by: pasala on 09/12/2022 05:25:17
Ok, all great scientists have started their career with ether only. The only experiment that disproved ether is Michelson experiment. However that experiment is true only when Earth and ether both makes their way in a single route / path. Though Einstein did not, as per Lorentz the GR is based on Ether only. It is new Ether.As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet,I don't know what Descartes assumed, but there is a place for a magnet.
For example, there's one on my fridge.It he had so, science will be in different shape.That's nonsense, all the experiments showed that the ether wasn't there.
Post by: paul cotter on 09/12/2022 10:58:32
Post by: DarkKnight on 09/12/2022 11:12:18
Ok, all great scientists have started their career with ether only. The only experiment that disproved ether is Michelson experiment. However that experiment is true only when Earth and ether both makes their way in a single route / path. Though Einstein did not, as per Lorentz the GR is based on Ether only. It is new Ether.As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet,I don't know what Descartes assumed, but there is a place for a magnet.
For example, there's one on my fridge.It he had so, science will be in different shape.That's nonsense, all the experiments showed that the ether wasn't there.
My opinion is that the experiment proved the existence of an ether rather than disproving it . It is a necessity for a medium for lights motion or the emptiness of space would conserve the energy , preventing the motion . There would be a wave-function collapse .
ste.jpg (24.62 kB . 369x325 - viewed 2358 times)Post by: pasala on 09/12/2022 11:43:08
Nonsense.Have you read this:
Isaac Newton suggests the existence of an aether in the Third Book of Opticks (1st ed. 1704; 2nd ed. 1718): "Doth not this aethereal medium in passing out of water, glass, crystal, and other compact and dense bodies in empty spaces, grow denser and denser by degrees, and by that means refract the rays of light not in a point, but by bending them gradually in curve lines? ...Is not this medium much rarer within the dense bodies of the Sun, stars, planets and comets, than in the empty celestial space between them? And in passing from them to great distances, doth it not grow denser and denser perpetually, and thereby cause the gravity of those great bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the bodies; every body endeavouring to go from the denser parts of the medium towards the rarer?"[2]
Post by: pasala on 09/12/2022 17:05:03
Whereas Destructive interference arises when two waves arrives together and a constructive interference, separated by dark regions of complete destructive interference.
If destructive interference arises, what happens to light waves, simply cancelled out, resulting in dark region.
So, it clearly tells us that light is equal to momentum. It is the momentum of particles i.e., electrons. Very momentum of electrons in space or ether gives wave like properties. Due to conservation of momentum at one place or the other, wave is cancelled out.
Suppose if we switch on an torch cell, if battery is new one, electrons moves out with much more pressure / force, so also light spreads to wide area. As the battery weakens, momentum of particles weakens, thereby weakening light.
It is true that energy is neither created nor destroyed. We are drawing electrons from the ether and again leaving them into space or ether.
Post by: Kryptid on 10/12/2022 17:32:06
We are drawing electrons from the ether and again leaving them into space or ether.
The electrons come from the battery itself. The total number of electrons in the circuit doesn't change, so there is no need to invoke electrons coming from or to some kind of aether. It is the energy of those electrons that allow the light to work, but the electrons are not used up or destroyed in the process.
Post by: pasala on 11/12/2022 13:27:22
Waves are oscillations, and they transport energy from one place to another. Thomas Young double slit experiment tells us that light is a wave. When two waves move together, it is constructive interference. If the two waves faces each other, it is destructive interference. In such case both the waves are cancelled out. In recent experiments, it is showing dots or particles on the screen.
Photoelectric effect is the emission of electrons by a metal surface when it is irradiated by light or more energetic photons. The kinetic energy of the emitted electrons depends on the frequency ν of the radiation, not on its intensity. for a given metal, there is a threshold frequency ν0 below which no electrons are emitted. Furthermore, emission takes place as soon as the light shines on the surface, there is no detectable delay.
Einstein showed that these results can be explained by two assumptions:
(1) that light is composed of corpuscles or photons, the energy of which is given by Planck’s relationship
(2) that an atom in the metal can absorb either a whole photon or nothing. Part of the energy of the absorbed photon frees an electron,
In the case of Electric light, there are two parts:
01 We are giving electrons as input
02 In turn it gives us Light wave or Electro magnetic radiation.
For several years, for me it is a big doubt, can’t we reproduce electrons from the light wave. From the Photo electric effect, it is clear that light consists of corpuscles only. However I could not accomplish it, due to different job and work pressure.
Recently I came know that some of the students from an IIT in India succeeded in re-producing electricity from light wave. That’s great work indeed.
For that Solar energy also works on the basis of Photo electric effect only
New Aether:
Space, in Descartes' view, is a plenum occupied by an ether, which, imperceptible to the senses, is capable of transmitting forces on material bodies immersed in it. Descartes assumed that the ether particles are in constant motion, but, as there is no empty space for them to move to, he inferred that they move to places vacated by other ether particles.
When you switch on a electric bulb, space is not empty, electrons moving out into the space faces other particles. In other words they charges them. Particles in the space also gains momentum, known as light wave.
At present we are of the opinion that space is empty. While producing solar energy, we are searching for the electrons that are ejected when light falls on a mettalic plate.
The magnetic field is the area around a magnet in which the effect of magnetism is felt. We use the magnetic field as a tool to describe how the magnetic force is distributed in the space around and within something magnetic in nature
Think of it, how a magnet gets a field. As said by Descartes it is due to Aether only. In the case of solar energy, particles coming out from Sun are charging the particles in the aether and causing them to move. As long as there is momentum of particles, it is visible light.
Let us forget about photo electric effect, think of how to catch those moving particles. If we succeed, our energy problems will be solved, permanently.
In the case of electric bulb:
Input = 60 wats
If output = Equal to or less than 60 wats, then there is no Aether. If output exceeds 60 wats, it tells us that there is aether.
I think this is Acid test for new aether.
Post by: Kryptid on 11/12/2022 13:45:57
Post by: paul cotter on 11/12/2022 16:10:48
Post by: pasala on 18/12/2022 12:01:45
You can't get more energy out than you put in. That would violate conservation of energy.That is true when space time is empty or void or nothing. As per the new aether proposed by me, space is not empty. As per GR mass curves or distort space time around it. Unless there is something in the space, how mass distort it.
In a light bulb, electrons are having momentum, they passes on the same to the particles in the open space and makes them to move. See the double slit experiment, when two waves go together it becomes constructive interference, in case if they faces each other it is destructive and wave end there itself.
Electrons moving out into the space, causes their counter parts to move and in turn it results in wave. See the difference, conservation of energy starts here.
Each ray is a big hope, let us plan how to catch it.
Post by: Kryptid on 18/12/2022 14:18:43
Unless there is something in the space, how mass distort it.
Space-time itself is what is being distorted. There is no need to complicate it by adding in something else that isn't necessary.
Post by: pasala on 24/12/2022 05:09:10
You can't get more energy out than you put in. That would violate conservation of energy.Ok, kryptid then what about step-up transformer. How it works. Whey conservation of energy is not working here.
Post by: The Spoon on 24/12/2022 08:57:50
What? You mean a device that steps up voltage but which reduces current? Maybe learn some science before posting some ridiculous 'gotcha'.You can't get more energy out than you put in. That would violate conservation of energy.Ok, kryptid then what about step-up transformer. How it works. Whey conservation of energy is not working here.
Post by: Origin on 24/12/2022 16:45:14
Ok, kryptid then what about step-up transformer. How it works. Whey conservation of energy is not working here.Yikes, you really need to learn the basics of physics before trying to come up with new theories.
Post by: Kryptid on 24/12/2022 22:49:53
You can't get more energy out than you put in. That would violate conservation of energy.Ok, kryptid then what about step-up transformer. How it works. Whey conservation of energy is not working here.
Transformers don't violate conservation of energy.
Post by: aasimz on 24/12/2022 23:21:01
in my view, ether was buried alive.
Well, too bad, because it doesn't seem like it will ever be resurrected.
What this space fabric is.
If you are interested in modern theory insights on Einstein's space fabric structure you have "Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG)" to look into.
So, you don't need æther since people have moved on with more than one innovative approach on that matter.
Quote
As a theory LQG postulates that the structure of space and time is composed of finite loops woven into an extremely fine fabric or network. These networks of loops are called spin networks. The evolution of a spin network, or spin foam, has a scale above the order of a Planck length, approximately 10−35 meters, and smaller scales are meaningless. Consequently, not just matter, but space itself, prefers an atomic structure.
Wikipedia | Loop Quantum Gravity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity)
Post by: pasala on 25/12/2022 03:10:21
See, I am talking in new aether perspective. It is all about input that is being given and output that we get. It is beyond dignity using such words, shameful on your part as well.What? You mean a device that steps up voltage but which reduces current? Maybe learn some science before posting some ridiculous 'gotcha'.You can't get more energy out than you put in. That would violate conservation of energy.Ok, kryptid then what about step-up transformer. How it works. Whey conservation of energy is not working here.
Post by: pasala on 25/12/2022 06:57:13
Faraday is one of the prominent physicists who considered aether as the propagating medium for electromagnetic force.
He introduced the concept of "lines of force" to demonstrate how electric and magnetic forces are transmitted between particles in an ambient medium, and to represent the disposition of these forces in space.
Thomson elaborated Faraday EMF field as a vortices in the aether. He also viewed the aether as a plenum in which forces acted in an ethereal continuum. Maxwell translated Thomson’s vortices into a mechanical model that depict action of the field in transmitting forces by the action of the particles in the aether.
MAXWELL While continuing to emphasize that electromagnetic phenomena were produced by the motions of particles in a mechanical aether, he used methods of Lagrangian analytical dynamics to represent the electromagnetic field instead.
This is to tell you how EMF is related to Aether and I don’t want to elaborate it or go deep into the subject.
ABOUT MAGNETIC FIELD:
Magnetic fields may be represented by continuous lines of force or magnetic flux that emerge from north-seeking magnetic poles and enter south-seeking magnetic poles. The density of the lines indicates the magnitude of the magnetic field. At the poles of a magnet, for example, where the magnetic field is strong, the field lines are crowded together, or more dense. Farther away, where the magnetic field is weak, they fan out, becoming less dense. A uniform magnetic field is represented by equally spaced parallel straight lines. The direction of the flux is the direction in which the north-seeking pole of a small magnet points. The lines of flux are continuous, forming closed loops.
HOW MAGNETIC FIELD IS USED TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY:
These generators are made up of coils of wire that are either rotated through magnetic fields or are stationary around a shaft with rotating magnets. In either case, the coils of wire are exposed to changing magnetic fields created by the magnets.
The magnets can be permanent or electric magnets. Permanent magnets are mainly used in small generators, and they have the advantage that they don't need a power supply. Electric magnets are iron or steel wound with wire. When electricity passes through the wire, the metal becomes magnetic and creates a magnetic field.
The coils of wire of the generators are conductors, and when the electrons in the wires are exposed to changing magnetic fields, they move, creating an electric current in the wires.
SOLAR ENERGY:
Sunlight is composed of photons or particles of solar energy. These photons contain varying amounts of energy that correspond to the different wavelengths of the solar spectrum.
A PV cell is made of semiconductor material. When photons strike a PV cell, they may reflect off the cell, pass through the cell or be absorbed by the semiconductor material. Only the absorbed photons provide energy to generate electricity. When the semiconductor material absorbs enough sunlight, electrons are dislodged from the material's atoms.
This design is based on the photo electric effect of Einstein.
Before going to the new Idea:
Around a permanent magnet or a wire carrying a steady electric current in one direction, the magnetic field is stationary and referred to as a magnetostatic field. At any given point its magnitude and direction remain the same. Around an alternating current or a fluctuating direct current, the magnetic field is continuously changing its magnitude and direction.
I would like to propose few changes to this based on new aether:
01 Let us imagine that in an electrical generator, you have placed alternator. Ok, both the magnets and alternator are at rest or stationary. Basic question is can we produce electricity.
02 It is true that magnetic field and alternator is within this field only.
03 It is only when the magnets or alternator is rotated, it cuts the magnetic field and generates electricity.
So in the case of Solar energy:
01 Design the panel in the shape of an umbrella in reverse shape.
02 Now to cut the Electromagnetic radiation we must rotate the conductor.
03 Present design is based on the Photo electric effect theory.
04 Change the design so as to suit the present thinking.
05 When photons strikes semi-conductor, most of which is reflected back and only small quantity is absorbed and an electron is released.
06 Instead, if the conductor is rotated, most of the particles are collected at the end, at zero percent waste.
The above holds good for production of electricity using EM radiation of an electric bulb.
Post by: Origin on 25/12/2022 13:49:27
HOW MAGNETIC FIELD IS USED TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY:
These generators are made up of coils of wire that are either rotated through magnetic fields or are stationary around a shaft with rotating magnets. In either case, the coils of wire are exposed to changing magnetic fields created by the magnets.
The magnets can be permanent or electric magnets. Permanent magnets are mainly used in small generators, and they have the advantage that they don't need a power supply. Electric magnets are iron or steel wound with wire. When electricity passes through the wire, the metal becomes magnetic and creates a magnetic field.
Stop plagiarizing, I'm sure that is against the rules!
From the site: https://ng.opera.news/ng/en/technology/60f0305c4c5ce830d0805ebd2458b19a (https://ng.opera.news/ng/en/technology/60f0305c4c5ce830d0805ebd2458b19a)
"These generators are made up of coils of wire that are either rotated through magnetic fields or are stationary around a shaft with rotating magnets. In either case, the coils of wire are exposed to changing magnetic fields created by the magnets.
The magnets can be permanent or electric magnets. Permanent magnets are mainly used in small generators, and they have the advantage that they don't need a power supply. Electric magnets are iron or steel wound with wire. When electricity passes through the wire, the metal becomes magnetic and creates a magnetic field."
Post by: JimmyW9 on 28/12/2022 19:54:12
Post by: pasala on 01/01/2023 13:45:10
Sure origin, i am not opposing that. The electric current produces the magnetic field because it also has the motion due to the movement of electrons from a negative to a positive end. The direction of the magnetic field is determined by the direction of the movement of electrons. We are taking magnetic field as the property of flowing electric current.HOW MAGNETIC FIELD IS USED TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY:
These generators are made up of coils of wire that are either rotated through magnetic fields or are stationary around a shaft with rotating magnets. In either case, the coils of wire are exposed to changing magnetic fields created by the magnets.
The magnets can be permanent or electric magnets. Permanent magnets are mainly used in small generators, and they have the advantage that they don't need a power supply. Electric magnets are iron or steel wound with wire. When electricity passes through the wire, the metal becomes magnetic and creates a magnetic field.
Stop plagiarizing, I'm sure that is against the rules!
From the site: https://ng.opera.news/ng/en/technology/60f0305c4c5ce830d0805ebd2458b19a (https://ng.opera.news/ng/en/technology/60f0305c4c5ce830d0805ebd2458b19a)
"These generators are made up of coils of wire that are either rotated through magnetic fields or are stationary around a shaft with rotating magnets. In either case, the coils of wire are exposed to changing magnetic fields created by the magnets.
The magnets can be permanent or electric magnets. Permanent magnets are mainly used in small generators, and they have the advantage that they don't need a power supply. Electric magnets are iron or steel wound with wire. When electricity passes through the wire, the metal becomes magnetic and creates a magnetic field."
But i am saying it as the property of space. See, only moving electrons are creating magnetic field.
In an electrical generator, we are moving either magnet or conductor and cutting the magnetic field. Ok, if the magnets or conductor is stationary or at rest can we produce electricity or cut the magnetic field.
Post by: Origin on 01/01/2023 14:17:52
Sure origin, i am not opposing that.Not opposed to what, plagiarizing?
Post by: pasala on 01/01/2023 14:29:27
Without base, nothing can be done. When you said it as against the rules. Anyway I don't want to go deep into that.Sure origin, i am not opposing that.Not opposed to what, plagiarizing?
Post by: pasala on 01/01/2023 14:50:04
Perhaps you just need to refer to some sources to support your claims.Well, in the case of double slit experiment, if two waves interfere with each other, destructive interference, both the waves are cancelled out. In recent experiments detectors are showing particles against the screen. In other words wave momentum is cancelled, resulting in particles.
So, in the case of solar panels also, light waves falling on the panel, if there is momentum moves out, if there is no momentum, spreads as particles. These are in fact raising radiation.
Ok, suppose if we rotate the panel, particles spread inside, including those ejected by atoms can be collected without any wastage.
We must plan, how to catch a ray. Now a days, science developed a lot, if scientists focusses, it is not a big issue.
Post by: pasala on 01/01/2023 15:48:23
Ok, basic definition, what ever site or where ever it may, never changes.Sure origin, i am not opposing that.Not opposed to what, plagiarizing?
Post by: Origin on 01/01/2023 16:22:25
So, in the case of solar panels also, light waves falling on the panel, if there is momentum moves out, if there is no momentum, spreads as particles. These are in fact raising radiation.Nonsense.
Ok, suppose if we rotate the panel, particles spread inside, including those ejected by atoms can be collected without any wastage.Nonsense.
The only thing you wrote that makes sense is the plagiarized content.
Post by: pasala on 05/03/2023 14:03:32
It is true that Newton's gravity theory "F = G(m1m2)/R2" is perfectly valid. Ok, if we go by GR there is gravity near to the masses.
What i am saying, as said by Descartes, this attraction between two masses is due to Aether. Whether we accept it or not, there is something present in between these two masses which is aiding or helping attraction between two masses and it weakens as distance increases.
I too accept, much research is needed in this area.
Post by: Origin on 05/03/2023 15:29:42
What i am saying, as said by Descartes, this attraction between two masses is due to Aether.So what, we now have over a century of evidence that there is no aether.
Whether we accept it or not, there is something present in between these two masses which is aiding or helping attraction between two masses and it weakens as distance increases.A statement without any evidence to back it up can be ignored.
Post by: Bored chemist on 05/03/2023 22:02:03
Whether we accept it or not, there is something present in between these two masses which is aiding or helping attraction between two masses and it weakens as distance increases.Whatever it may be, it doesn't have the properties that were ascribed to the luminiferous aether.
And it is deeply unhelpful to call it "aether" because that might make some fools think that the aether is real.