[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's a wise quote from Alan.

But you can have a policy about people who persistently ignore the laws of physics or persistently break the rules.

Like Bruno, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Maxwell.....not to mention Semmelweiss, Pasteur, Jenner, and everyone else who flagrantly ignored the laws of chemistry and the practice of medicine.
Science is different from mining.
It can take decades to recognise a nugget, and only then do you realise that everything you once considered valuable is actually dross.
Problem is that an awful lot of new dross is presented here as potential nuggets. But it keeps the miners alert and amused.

To distinguish a nugget from trash faster, you can expose it as transparently as possible, and let more people to examine it.
I think I've revealed my idea about magnetism in an easy to understand reasoning, with a simple method to experimentally verify or falsify it, so that anyone with a decent amount of willingness and resources can replicate it. Let's see if we've hit a jackpot, or it's just a mirage emerged from a high hope.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The voltage shown in the Voltmeter of the experiment must be generated from these mass flow difference of the ions, considering that other factors are equally applied to both containers. But some factors may effectively reduce the voltage, such as adhesion, cohesion, molecular dipole, etc.

The next step in to explain the experimental results theoretically, is constructing equation to calculate electrodynamic force exerted to a test particle by a moving charged particle. The result might be similar to Biot-Savart's law, but instead of continuous integration with integral symbol, the new equation should use discrete summation with Sigma symbol.

The new equation should also incorporate some well known principles in physics, such as preservation of momentum and angular momentum.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The electrodynamic force should be proportional to the particle's velocity, mass, and electric charge. Velocity times mass of an object is called momentum. Thus the force would be proportional to charge times the momentum.
For a start, let's just use the simplest cases where the test particle is stationary. The current carrying ions would exert a force to the test particle.

My suspicion to the fundamentality of magnetic field came up when I first learned about magnetic field and how it interact with charged particles. First, B field around a current carrying wire is described by the Biot?Savart law, which involve a cross product between vector line element of the wire and a unit vector in the direction of the distance between the location of the line element and the location where the magnetic field is calculated.
But then the calculation of the magnetic force to a test particle involve a cross product between the B field and the instantaneous velocity of the test particle using Lorentz force law. The final resulting force from those two cross products would then be a push or pull.
My suspicion got stronger when I learned about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_paradox.
and A field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_vector_potential

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Reality's challenge to physics | Michio Kaku, Avshalom Elitzur, Tim Maudlin and Jimena Canales

Avshalom Elitzur, Michio Kaku, Tim Maudlin and Jimena Canales thrash out the implications of what current physics says about the nature of time.

Does time really flow in the way we think it does?

In our everyday experience, time is an inescapable backdrop against which events unfold, allowing us to sequence events and measure durations. Yet in the hundred years since Einstein's theory of general relativity, physics has had a radically different account. Time does not flow, there is no before and after. We are not born and we do not die. The entirety of spacetime is given at the outset of the universe. There is no cause and effect. Is this radical discrepancy with our everyday experience a threat to physics or a threat to our understanding of what it is to be alive?

Should we take seriously claims of physicists that everyday experience is an illusion? Or is it their model of the universe that is mistaken? Or are these two profoundly different accounts of time the product of frames of understanding that will always remain incompatible?

#michiokaku  #time  #physics

Quantum theorist Avshalom Elitzur, theoretical physicist Michio Kaku, philosopher of physics Tim Maudlin, and historian of science Jimena Canales delve into the fascinating conundrum of time. G?neş Taylor hosts.

When we get unexpected results, it means that we have made one or more false assumptions in constructing that expectation.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Now I'm done recording the experiment using 3 types of chloride salts, ie NaCl, KCl, and MgCl2. It will take some time to edit, add narrative and illustration, and then upload it to my YouTube channel. So please be patient, since I'm having a tight schedule in my work place. So little time so much to do.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Relativity and Magnetism - Did Veritasium Get it Right

If you watch carefully, you may find what looks like a mistake in the Veritasium video about electricity, magnetism, and special relativity. Here I explain that apparent mistake.

This video is a response to a Veritasium video explaining magnetism as relativistic effects of moving electric charge. He says that Veritasium video is incomplete for not mentioning about electric holes.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's the referred video.

How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work

Magnetism seems like a pretty magical phenomenon. Rocks that attract or repel each other at a distance - that's really cool - and electric current in a wire interacts in the same way. What's even more amazing is how it works. We normally think of special relativity as having little bearing on our lives because everything happens at such low speeds that relativistic effects are negligible. But when you consider the large number of charges in a wire and the strength of the electric interaction, you can see that electromagnets function thanks to the special relativistic effect of length contraction. In a frame of reference moving with the charges, there is an electric field that creates a force on the charges. But in the lab frame, there is no electric field so it must be a magnetic field creating the force. Hence we see that a magnetic field is what an electric field becomes when an electrically charged object starts moving.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

In my culture, there's a famous proverb saying that elephant on eyelid is invisible. It may describe our long unsuccessful search to find the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism.
What we need is a little step back to see things not too closely. Our conviction that magnetism is nothing more than electricity in motion has prevented us from seeing its connection with other kinds of physical interactions, like mass of the current carrying particles.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Now I'm done recording the experiment using 3 types of chloride salts, ie NaCl, KCl, and MgCl2. It will take some time to edit, add narrative and illustration, and then upload it to my YouTube channel. So please be patient, since I'm having a tight schedule in my work place. So little time so much to do.

Her are some observations during the experiment.
Even with the same solutions in both containers, and no electric current flowing through them, some voltage was shown. It disappeared when the cans were connected, but reappeared after they were disconnected.
Difference in volume of the liquids affects the voltage readings, even with no current.
Electrostatic charge build up on the liquids affects the voltage readings. It can occur when the liquid is poured into the container, or other handling related to triboelectricity.

To minimize variance, the solutions used in the experiment were set to have conductivity around 19 mS/cm, because the portable conductivity meter I used can't show any value above 20 mS/cm.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Why moving charges produce magnetic field?

He asks an interesting question at around 14:45.
Does magnetic field not exist at all? Is it only electric field and Coulomb's law?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Now I'm done recording the experiment using 3 types of chloride salts, ie NaCl, KCl, and MgCl2. It will take some time to edit, add narrative and illustration, and then upload it to my YouTube channel. So please be patient, since I'm having a tight schedule in my work place. So little time so much to do.

Her are some observations during the experiment.
Even with the same solutions in both containers, and no electric current flowing through them, some voltage was shown. It disappeared when the cans were connected, but reappeared after they were disconnected.
Difference in volume of the liquids affects the voltage readings, even with no current.
Electrostatic charge build up on the liquids affects the voltage readings. It can occur when the liquid is poured into the container, or other handling related to triboelectricity.

To minimize variance, the solutions used in the experiment were set to have conductivity around 19 mS/cm, because the portable conductivity meter I used can't show any value above 20 mS/cm.

You might be sceptical about the experiment, and want to conduct it yourself to be sure. So, here's a sneak peek from a screenshot of the video recording. I hope it can help you replicate the experiment.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

A physicist youtuber thinks that electricity and magnetism are the same thing.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I searched for electrogravity on Youtube, and this video shows up in the results.

Simple Science Experiment to Understand Electro-Gravity

What is Gravity? 
This video will show the reasons why Gravity can be understood as a side-effect of normal electromagnetic forces.   

In this ongoing video series, I will show several science experiments to demonstrate the special forces from the divergent electric field.  I will also show how the Laplace Force from the Lorentz Equation is an important key to understanding gravity as an electromagnetic effect and is the "engine" behind the electric universe effects.

[Eternal Student]

Hi.

A physicist youtuber thinks that electricity and magnetism are the same thing.

    I haven't watched the video but it sounds sensible.   On the microsocopic level, such as in the standard model of particle physics, the E and B fields are considered to be manifestations of the same sort of interactions by the same gauge boson.   On a macroscopic level, B fields do become E fields (and vice versa) when you change frames of reference so that moving charges become still.

    It can get a bit tricky if you consider the intrinsic spin of fundamental particles.    We don't don't imagine spin as if the particle is literally spinning around,  it just seems to be an intrinsic property that a fundamental particle can have.    There is some relationship between spin and a magnetic field, which can be observed by examining various experiments involving Stern-Gerlach apparatus.  Since spin isn't just a motion of the particle changing reference frames won't keep it still.   For fundamental particles there is nothing smaller you can chop it into - so it's not even sensible to consider the B field to be due to motion of several components around each other and hope to keep one component still at a time.  Hence, it would seem that there are some B fields that cannot be reduced to an E field in any frame.   

Best Wishes.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Hence, it would seem that there are some B fields that cannot be reduced to an E field in any frame.   

Doesn't it mean that they are not the same?

[Eternal Student]

Hi.

Doesn't it mean that they are not the same?

   Yes, that is the implication.

Hopefully you haven't missed this bit:

On the microsocopic level, such as in the standard model of particle physics, the E and B fields are considered to be manifestations of the same sort of interactions by the same gauge boson.

    Under the standard model of particle physics,  there isn't a B and E field.    There is a photon field and separate fields for all the other particles.   On this scale or using this model,  it would still be correct to say that the interactions are due to one common field.

Best Wishes.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Under the standard model of particle physics,  there isn't a B and E field.    There is a photon field and separate fields for all the other particles.   On this scale or using this model,  it would still be correct to say that the interactions are due to one common field.

What caused the voltage in my electrodynamic balance, according to the standard model?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Afaik, standard model excludes gravity. That's why we came to current situation in physics.

string theory lied to us and now science communication is hard

String theory lied to us and now science communication is hard.

This is just my opinion man. String theory is not bad. String theory is fine and interesting. String theory was communicated.....you could say poorly or could say deceptively.

[alancalverd]

If gravity and magnetism are related, you should be able to predict the behavior of gravity when you alter a magnetic field.

Please make a prediction and test it.

[Eternal Student]

Hi.

What caused the voltage in my electrodynamic balance, according to the standard model?

   I haven't seen the details of your experiment, sorry.
   At a guess you had some arrangement of reagents and electrodes so that the set-up became slightly voltaic  (I think another term often used is "galvanic" rather than "voltaic").
    When you ask "according to the standard model"  that is probably asking for pages of work - because there were particles of almost every type in your set up.   Ultimately it should be due to the initial conditions of all the particle fields and their evolution under the standard model.   I wouldn't be able to build a complete model of your system and I think most people would just focus on an aspect of it.

Best Wishes.