0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.
While finishing the video of the first experiment, I'm planning to make the next one. I think it's worth to see if one side of the balance contains a normal conductor which has electrons as its current carrier. Perhaps the discs below the containers can be replaced by isolators. We'll see.
What's the reference for v?
I think that was just a given from the book, I will have to go check back on it and see!
That is precisely why I used such an example. This being a science forum we are interested in science, not philosophy. Water will affect fire but that does not mean they are related, one being a material and the other a combustion phenomenon. Similarly gravity affects em radiation but they are NOT related.
I don't look at videos so I have no idea as to what you are doing.
Here's the sketch of the experimental setup. I think this is so simple that anyone can replicate it.In case it hasn't been obvious, the whole system should be electrically isolated from its environment. Including the ground below the cans.A represents clamp Ampere meter in AC mode. V represents Voltmeter in DC millivolt mode.
While science does not have all the answers
Is there anything that is not clear yet?
worth exploring.
Not quite sure what to make of that setup. I see two containers of electrolytes, connected in series with an ac supply, with a clamp meter monitoring the current. No mention of the electrode material which needs to be stated in any electrolysis experiment. I also see a voltmeter connected between the stands? I can't figure out the purpose of this setup or where this could lead to a conflict with standard theory. Also why two different electrolytes?
During the early recording, I was bothered by some silly problems like loose connections, LCD display of the Voltmeter unclear/unreadable due to viewing angle of the camera, and lack of zeroing/balancing switch. It makes the video much longer than it should.I think I'll reshoot the video after making some improvements in the setup.Here's the idea. Electric current is said to generate magnetic field, and magnetic field is said to induce force to moving electric charges. But movement is relative. In a current carrying wire, positively charged metal lattice is stationary relative to the bulk of the wire, while the negatively charged electrons flow in it, hence moving. Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 30/08/2023 06:09:24Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 02/07/2016 13:47:55Here is the visualization of the second experiment, which start from the first as described before. If the charged particle is stationary to the wire, no magnetic force is received.Next, the wire is zoomed to show the electrons and metal atoms inside.From the picture above, the electrons inside the wire move to the left with speed v, but particle q doesn't receive magnetic force.Now if the wire is moved to the right with speed v, the speed of electrons becomes 0, while the speed of the metal atoms = v. It is shown that magnetic force F is produced downward.The picture above is equivalent to the picture from previous post.Here we can conclude that electron's movement is not responded by the particle, while atom's movement produces magnetic force to the particle. It seems that for a long time we had missed the difference between atoms and free electrons which cause electric current and produce magnetic force.For the second experiment, we will study the effect of the movement of charged particles inside a conductor (or convector) toward the test particle. We will study the hypothesis that magnetic force is not only affected by the magnitude of electric charge that moves inside a conductor (or convector), but also affected by the mass of the particle.Electric current in a copper wire is produced by the flow of electrons inside. The charge and mass of electrons are always the same, so we need some other particles as electric current producers to get reference. For that we will replace the conductor by a hose filled by electrolyte solution that contains ions, since ions are also electrically charged and have various masses. Some of electrolytic solutions that will be used are NaCl, H2SO4, HCl, CuSO4, FeCl3.We can make a table showing the force experienced by the stationary test particle in various velocities of both positive and negative particles in the wire. I'll use standard Lorentz force to calculate the force, which states that F = B.q.vWhere B is proportional to electric current in the wire, which depends on velocity difference between positive and negative particles in the wire.v represents the velocity difference between the test particle and the wire. Since the test particle is stationary, it's merely determined by the velocity of positive particles in the wire.It's assumed that all positive particles have uniform velocity. Negative particle has uniform velocity as well.The first table below shows the value of electric current, which depends on the difference of velocity between positive and negative particle in the wire. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8-3 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-2 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6-1 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 1 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 2 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 4 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0The second table below shows the velocity of the wire relative to test particle. It's determined solely by velocity of positive particle. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-3 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 3 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4The third table shows the force experienced by test particle, which is simply the multiplication of each cell in both tables above. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 0 -3 -4 -3 0 5 12 21 32-3 4 0 -2 -2 0 4 10 18 28-2 8 3 0 -1 0 3 8 15 24-1 12 6 2 0 0 2 6 12 200 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 161 20 12 6 2 0 0 2 6 122 24 15 8 3 0 -1 0 3 83 28 18 10 4 0 -2 -2 0 44 32 21 12 5 0 -3 -4 -3 0Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 21/09/2023 19:56:19Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 30/08/2023 12:16:20There are more positive values than negative values. Thus if the velocities of particles in the wire are random, it's more likely for the test particle to be pushed away.When the electrons in the wire are kept stationary, the Lorentz force to the test particle is proportional to the square of wire's speed.It seems like the Lorentz force can still be generated with alternating current. This is what we'll try to detect in an experiment. In salt solutions, the electric current is produced by ions which have significantly higher mass/charge ratio than electrons. Different ions may have different mass/charge ratio, which can be useful to distinguish the magnetic forces that they produce to test particles. In the experiments with electrolytic solutions, alternating current has clear advantage, which is the lack of bubbling gas or precipitate at the electrodes which can obstruct or alter prolonged experiment. Since we are dealing with weak signal, I think it would be better to measure the resulting potential difference between two electromagnetic/electrohydrodynamic forces instead of measuring the force directly. It works like a Wheatstone bridge. Instead of a hose like in the original plan, I used two plastic containers filled with salt solutions. Each container is equipped with two stainless steel plate electrodes, which makes them act like resistors. They are then electrically connected in series to guarantee that same amount of current will flow through them at the same time.To measure the generated magnetic force to test particle, an empty metal can is inserted below each container. The electrons in the can metal will be attracted by the force, which would produce some positive potential at the bottom of the cans. Different types of solution would produce different strength of magnetic force, which translates to potential difference at the bottom of the cans. A digital Voltmeter with 0.1 mV precision should be able to read it.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 02/07/2016 13:47:55Here is the visualization of the second experiment, which start from the first as described before. If the charged particle is stationary to the wire, no magnetic force is received.Next, the wire is zoomed to show the electrons and metal atoms inside.From the picture above, the electrons inside the wire move to the left with speed v, but particle q doesn't receive magnetic force.Now if the wire is moved to the right with speed v, the speed of electrons becomes 0, while the speed of the metal atoms = v. It is shown that magnetic force F is produced downward.The picture above is equivalent to the picture from previous post.Here we can conclude that electron's movement is not responded by the particle, while atom's movement produces magnetic force to the particle. It seems that for a long time we had missed the difference between atoms and free electrons which cause electric current and produce magnetic force.For the second experiment, we will study the effect of the movement of charged particles inside a conductor (or convector) toward the test particle. We will study the hypothesis that magnetic force is not only affected by the magnitude of electric charge that moves inside a conductor (or convector), but also affected by the mass of the particle.Electric current in a copper wire is produced by the flow of electrons inside. The charge and mass of electrons are always the same, so we need some other particles as electric current producers to get reference. For that we will replace the conductor by a hose filled by electrolyte solution that contains ions, since ions are also electrically charged and have various masses. Some of electrolytic solutions that will be used are NaCl, H2SO4, HCl, CuSO4, FeCl3.We can make a table showing the force experienced by the stationary test particle in various velocities of both positive and negative particles in the wire. I'll use standard Lorentz force to calculate the force, which states that F = B.q.vWhere B is proportional to electric current in the wire, which depends on velocity difference between positive and negative particles in the wire.v represents the velocity difference between the test particle and the wire. Since the test particle is stationary, it's merely determined by the velocity of positive particles in the wire.It's assumed that all positive particles have uniform velocity. Negative particle has uniform velocity as well.The first table below shows the value of electric current, which depends on the difference of velocity between positive and negative particle in the wire. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8-3 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-2 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6-1 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 1 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 2 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 4 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0The second table below shows the velocity of the wire relative to test particle. It's determined solely by velocity of positive particle. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-3 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4-1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 1 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 3 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4The third table shows the force experienced by test particle, which is simply the multiplication of each cell in both tables above. v+ -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4v- -4 0 -3 -4 -3 0 5 12 21 32-3 4 0 -2 -2 0 4 10 18 28-2 8 3 0 -1 0 3 8 15 24-1 12 6 2 0 0 2 6 12 200 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 161 20 12 6 2 0 0 2 6 122 24 15 8 3 0 -1 0 3 83 28 18 10 4 0 -2 -2 0 44 32 21 12 5 0 -3 -4 -3 0
Here is the visualization of the second experiment, which start from the first as described before. If the charged particle is stationary to the wire, no magnetic force is received.Next, the wire is zoomed to show the electrons and metal atoms inside.From the picture above, the electrons inside the wire move to the left with speed v, but particle q doesn't receive magnetic force.Now if the wire is moved to the right with speed v, the speed of electrons becomes 0, while the speed of the metal atoms = v. It is shown that magnetic force F is produced downward.The picture above is equivalent to the picture from previous post.Here we can conclude that electron's movement is not responded by the particle, while atom's movement produces magnetic force to the particle. It seems that for a long time we had missed the difference between atoms and free electrons which cause electric current and produce magnetic force.For the second experiment, we will study the effect of the movement of charged particles inside a conductor (or convector) toward the test particle. We will study the hypothesis that magnetic force is not only affected by the magnitude of electric charge that moves inside a conductor (or convector), but also affected by the mass of the particle.Electric current in a copper wire is produced by the flow of electrons inside. The charge and mass of electrons are always the same, so we need some other particles as electric current producers to get reference. For that we will replace the conductor by a hose filled by electrolyte solution that contains ions, since ions are also electrically charged and have various masses. Some of electrolytic solutions that will be used are NaCl, H2SO4, HCl, CuSO4, FeCl3.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 30/08/2023 12:16:20There are more positive values than negative values. Thus if the velocities of particles in the wire are random, it's more likely for the test particle to be pushed away.When the electrons in the wire are kept stationary, the Lorentz force to the test particle is proportional to the square of wire's speed.It seems like the Lorentz force can still be generated with alternating current. This is what we'll try to detect in an experiment.
There are more positive values than negative values. Thus if the velocities of particles in the wire are random, it's more likely for the test particle to be pushed away.When the electrons in the wire are kept stationary, the Lorentz force to the test particle is proportional to the square of wire's speed.
Yes, there are gaps in scientific knowledge and in my opinion there always will be. However these gaps are in the extremes and not in an area where you or I could add anything of benefit.
Out of nowhere, a 26 year old derived the Telegrapher's Equations for the first time. His name was Oliver Heaviside. In 1876, "On the Extra Current", Heaviside introduced the new ideas of Maxwell's dynamic theory of electromagnetism to unlock to a new mode of propagation which went beyond the conventional diffusion model - a wave. This is the story of how the Telegrapher's Equations came to be. Starting with Fourier's magnus opus, to William Thomson's (Lord Kelvin) application of the diffusion equation to the 2000 mile transatlantic cable, and finally to Heaviside, who made the final leap, incorporating wave like properties.Corrections: 00:50 the date on the cable should be 1858, not 1958! blurred out now.
Not so, Hamdani. Moving the wire right or left does not provide a VxB and a downward force on the test particle q. The B field does not move when the wire is moved in the direction of the current.
You seem to have connected the two electrolytic cells together with a piece of wire, then attempt to measure the potential difference between them with a voltmeter. I think Georg Ohm covered this in his 1827 treatise. For many purposes you can treat an electrolytic cell as a near-constant-current device, so V depends on the resistance of the connecting wire between them.
The electrons in the can metal will be attracted by the force,
Let's make a test case to make it clear and unambiguous. A small metal ball charged with +1 Coulomb is hung up and stationary in the frame of a lab.
For many purposes you can treat an electrolytic cell as a near-constant-current device,
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 05/06/2024 10:38:32The electrons in the can metal will be attracted by the force, Electrons are not attracted by a magnetic field.