[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Maxwell's equation deal with simple symmetric topologies,

More complex topology is supposed to be solvable using the principle of superposition. Even when analytical solution is not possible, at least numerical methods can help with adequately accurate approximations.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Perhaps 17 pages weren't enough to describe the problem so clearly that everyone can understand. But at least you have now realized that three cases above are not identical.

The question that follows naturally from the realization above is, what makes them different? And that's exactly what I tried to find out when starting this thread.
My experiment with electrodynamic balance pointed at their mass to charge ratio as a potential answer. But more research is necessary to eliminate (or identify!) other factors.

[paul cotter]

You seem to be the only one who has problems understanding "the origin of the magnetic field". Yet at times you say things that suggest you do actually understand and you just want to argue these points for argument's sake.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You seem to be the only one who has problems understanding "the origin of the magnetic field". Yet at times you say things that suggest you do actually understand and you just want to argue these points for argument's sake.

Understanding is the second level of thinking, after remembering. Understanding a concept requires the ability to explain it by making relationship with other things we are more familiar with.

I. Knowledge. Remembering information.
II. Comprehension. Explaining the meaning of information.
III. Application. Using abstractions in concrete situations.
IV. Analysis. Breaking down a whole into component parts.
V. Synthesis. Putting parts together to form a new and integrated whole.
VI. Evaluation.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Maxwell's equation deal with simple symmetric topologies, if you explore any other conditions you have add minor alterations. This does not in any way impugn these equations. Permittivity and permeability are most definitely NOT fudge factors, they are fundamental properties of space. You are going round in circles like a dog chasing it's tail, and not learning anything.

What's the permittivity and permeability of space between two water molecules in the center of an ice block at 1 atm and 0 centigrade?
How does iron core affect magnetic field around a current carrying solenoid?

Another example where the permittivity and permeability of space are affected by materials nearby is evanescent waves. I demonstrated it in microwave frequency using both ordinary material and metamaterial.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

But if the distance between them is reduced to just 1 nm, you need to use different ε and μ for most practical purposes.

Why?

Because at small enough gap, the electrons from one conductor plate can easily jump to the other plate. The gap stops behaving like a dielectric material, and starts behaving like a conductor.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You seem to be the only one who has problems understanding "the origin of the magnetic field". Yet at times you say things that suggest you do actually understand and you just want to argue these points for argument's sake.

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

I thought my explanation in the op as well as my video of theoretical background in this topic were simple enough. It seems like they can still be simplified further.

Imagine a long straight wire carrying one Ampere electric current to the right. 1 meter above it, there's a device measuring electric and magnetic field at the same time. When they are stationary to each other, the device shows some magnetic field but zero electric field.  When the device is moving parallel with the wire, the electric field has some value, and the magnetic field changes.
This is the basic scenario for explaining magnetism through special theory of relativity as described by Edward Purcell.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Imagine a long straight wire carrying one Ampere electric current to the right. 1 meter above it, there's a device measuring electric and magnetic field at the same time. When they are stationary to each other, the device shows some magnetic field but zero electric field.  When the device is moving parallel with the wire, the electric field has some value, and the magnetic field changes.
This is the basic scenario for explaining magnetism through special theory of relativity as described by Edward Purcell.

The magnetic and electric field are vectors. They have directions beside the magnitude. What their direction will be when the motion of the measuring device is constrained to be parallel to the wire?

Is it possible to convert all of the magnetic field into electric field? How fast would the measuring device has to move, relative to the wire? In which direction?

Can it make the direction of the electric field or magnetic field to reverse?

Anyone who truly understand the real mechanism of electromagnetism should be able to answer those questions above.

[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.

At last. The main experiment of electrodynamic balance. It's still quite crude and need refining, but it still contains some valuable information.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

This effect is not explained by Maxwell's electrodynamics.

Einstein De Haas Effect

Demonstrate the spin angular momentum of electrons.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's my new video on investigating the origin of magnetic force, it simplifies the design of electrodynamic balance using aluminum foil in one of the containers as reference. The current carrying particles in the metal are the free electrons. This makes the effect of atomic weights of the current carrying ions to the electrodynamic force exerted to free electrons at the base metals more obvious.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What is the currently accepted explanation for the voltage generation shown in my latest video above?
What else do I need to provide to convince scientific society that this is a new phenomenon?

I think my latest experimental design is simple enough and safe enough to be reproduced by any high school physics labs, or even mere curious hobbyist. They should be able to verify my findings, or find other new things I haven't covered here.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I asked ChatGPT. Does electric current generated by moving ions produce the same magnetic field as moving electrons?

Yes, the electric current generated by moving ions produces the same type of magnetic field as moving electrons, as long as the magnitude and direction of the current are the same. The magnetic field depends on the motion of charge, not the specific nature of the charged particle (whether it's an electron, ion, or any other charged particle).

Key Points:

1. Magnetic Field and Current:

A moving charge, whether positive or negative, generates a magnetic field according to Amp?re's Law and the Biot-Savart Law.

The magnetic field's direction is determined by the right-hand rule and depends on the direction of the current, not the type of charge.



2. Nature of the Current:

Current () is defined as the rate of flow of charge ().

A positive ion moving in one direction produces the same current as a negative electron moving in the opposite direction.



3. Magnetic Field Direction:

For a positively charged ion moving in a given direction, the magnetic field's direction is determined by the right-hand rule for that direction.

For a negatively charged electron moving in the opposite direction, the same magnetic field is produced because the current direction (defined by conventional current as the flow of positive charge) is the same.



4. Example:

A stream of positively charged ions moving to the right creates a magnetic field with the same characteristics as a stream of negatively charged electrons moving to the left, provided the current (amount of charge per unit time) is equal in both cases.




Thus, the generated magnetic field is independent of whether the current is carried by electrons, protons, or ions; it depends only on the magnitude and direction of the current.

While Gemini answers to the same question.

Yes, electric current generated by moving ions produces the same magnetic field as moving electrons. This is because the magnetic field generated by a moving charge depends solely on the charge of the particle and its velocity, not on the type of particle itself.
Both electrons and ions are charged particles, and when they move, they create a magnetic field around them. The strength and direction of the magnetic field depend on the magnitude and direction of the current, which is the rate of flow of charge.
Therefore, whether the current is carried by electrons in a metal wire or by ions in an electrolyte solution, the resulting magnetic field will be the same, given the same current.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I changed the question slightly. Does electric current generated by moving ions produce the same electromagnetic force as moving electrons?
ChatGPT answers.

The electromagnetic force produced by an electric current is the same whether it is generated by moving ions or moving electrons, provided the current (amount of charge flow per unit time) and the conditions are identical. Here's a breakdown of the reasoning:

Electromagnetic Force (Lorentz Force)

1. Magnetic Component:

A current () in a conductor or a moving charged particle generates a magnetic field.

If another charged particle moves through this magnetic field, it experiences a force given by the Lorentz force law:




\mathbf{F} = q(\mathbf{v} \times \mathbf{B})

The magnetic field () depends on the current () and not on whether the current is carried by electrons, protons, or ions. Hence, the resulting magnetic force is the same for a given current.


2. Electric Component:

A current can also generate an electric field if there is a charge imbalance or in cases involving time-varying currents (via Maxwell's equations). The resulting electric force is:




\mathbf{F} = q\mathbf{E}

Again, this force depends on the field strength () and the charge (), not the type of charge carrier producing the current.


Key Considerations

Current Magnitude:

For the same current magnitude (, where  is charge,  is charge density,  is cross-sectional area, and  is drift velocity), the electromagnetic effects will be identical regardless of whether the current is carried by electrons or ions.


Charge and Velocity:

Positive ions are usually much heavier than electrons. For a given current, ions will have a much smaller drift velocity than electrons due to their larger mass. However, this difference in velocity does not affect the electromagnetic force because the total current determines the field, not the individual velocities.


Charge Sign:

The sign of the charge does not affect the magnitude of the electromagnetic force, only its direction. For example, a positive ion moving to the right produces the same force as a negative electron moving to the left.



Conclusion

The electromagnetic force generated by an electric current is the same for moving ions as for moving electrons, as long as the current and conditions (such as field configuration) are the same. The nature of the charge carriers (ions vs. electrons) does not change the fundamental electromagnetic interaction.

While Gemini answers.

The electromagnetic force produced by an electric current is the same whether it is generated by moving ions or moving electrons, provided the current (amount of charge flow per unit time) and the conditions are identical. Here's a breakdown of the reasoning:

Electromagnetic Force (Lorentz Force)

1. Magnetic Component:

A current () in a conductor or a moving charged particle generates a magnetic field.

If another charged particle moves through this magnetic field, it experiences a force given by the Lorentz force law:




\mathbf{F} = q(\mathbf{v} \times \mathbf{B})

The magnetic field () depends on the current () and not on whether the current is carried by electrons, protons, or ions. Hence, the resulting magnetic force is the same for a given current.


2. Electric Component:

A current can also generate an electric field if there is a charge imbalance or in cases involving time-varying currents (via Maxwell's equations). The resulting electric force is:




\mathbf{F} = q\mathbf{E}

Again, this force depends on the field strength () and the charge (), not the type of charge carrier producing the current.


Key Considerations

Current Magnitude:

For the same current magnitude (, where  is charge,  is charge density,  is cross-sectional area, and  is drift velocity), the electromagnetic effects will be identical regardless of whether the current is carried by electrons or ions.


Charge and Velocity:

Positive ions are usually much heavier than electrons. For a given current, ions will have a much smaller drift velocity than electrons due to their larger mass. However, this difference in velocity does not affect the electromagnetic force because the total current determines the field, not the individual velocities.


Charge Sign:

The sign of the charge does not affect the magnitude of the electromagnetic force, only its direction. For example, a positive ion moving to the right produces the same force as a negative electron moving to the left.



Conclusion

The electromagnetic force generated by an electric current is the same for moving ions as for moving electrons, as long as the current and conditions (such as field configuration) are the same. The nature of the charge carriers (ions vs. electrons) does not change the fundamental electromagnetic interaction.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Isn't there any experimental research showing that ionic current produces electromotive force while electronic current doesn't?

ChatGPT
No, there is no credible experimental evidence or research indicating that ionic currents produce electromotive force (EMF) while electronic currents do not. Both ionic and electronic currents follow the same fundamental principles of electromagnetism as described by Maxwell's equations. Here's why:

Electromotive Force (EMF) and Current

EMF is defined as the energy supplied per unit charge to move charges around a circuit. It is typically generated by:

Electrochemical reactions (e.g., in batteries).

Time-varying magnetic fields (Faraday's Law of Induction).

Thermal gradients (Seebeck effect).

Pressure or deformation gradients (piezoelectric effect).


EMF is independent of the type of charge carrier. Both electrons and ions can contribute to the current in a conductor, and the generation of EMF depends on the physical mechanism (chemical reaction, magnetic induction, etc.) and not the carrier type.


Experimental Evidence

1. Faraday's Law of Induction:

Experiments involving time-varying magnetic fields demonstrate that EMF is produced regardless of whether the current is ionic (e.g., in electrolytes) or electronic (e.g., in metal wires).



2. Electrolyte and Plasma Studies:

In electrolytes and plasmas, where ions carry current, the measured EMF behaves identically to that in metallic conductors, following the same laws of electromagnetism.



3. Batteries and Fuel Cells:

In batteries, ions carry current internally, while electrons carry current externally through a circuit. The EMF generated is consistent with theoretical predictions and independent of whether ions or electrons are the carriers.




Theoretical Basis

1. Maxwell's Equations:

Electromagnetic phenomena depend on the motion of charge, irrespective of the type of charge carrier.

The current density () determines the magnetic and electric fields and is calculated as:




\mathbf{J} = nq\mathbf{v}

2. Charge Carrier Independence:

The Lorentz force and Biot-Savart law depend on the flow of charge, not the specific nature of the carriers. Whether the carriers are ions or electrons, the resulting magnetic and electric effects are the same.




Conclusion

The claim that ionic currents generate EMF while electronic currents do not is inconsistent with established physical laws and experimental data. Both ionic and electronic currents produce EMF and electromagnetic effects in accordance with the same fundamental principles of electromagnetism. If you have encountered a source making this claim, it may involve a misunderstanding or a misrepresentation of experimental results. Feel free to share details for further clarification!

Gemini

There is no experimental evidence suggesting that ionic current produces electromotive force (EMF) differently from electronic current. Both types of current, when flowing through a conductor, can generate EMF under specific conditions, such as in batteries or generators.
In batteries, for example, chemical reactions involving the movement of ions create a potential difference, which is a form of EMF. Similarly, in generators, the movement of electrons in a conductor through a magnetic field induces an EMF.
The key factor determining the generation of EMF is the movement of charges, regardless of whether they are electrons or ions. The Lorentz force law, which governs the behavior of charged particles in electromagnetic fields, applies equally to both types of charge carriers.
Therefore, it is not accurate to say that ionic current produces EMF differently from electronic current. Both types of current can generate EMF under appropriate conditions, and the underlying principles are the same.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

It seems like my experiments and their theoretical background haven't been part of the training data for both Gemini and ChatGPT. They could be a new science with a potential to become the missing link in modern physics.

[alancalverd]

Just for once the chatbots seem to be right.

What thickness of Al foil were you using? Was it pure Al? The resistance measurement seems remarkably high.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Just for once the chatbots seem to be right.

What thickness of Al foil were you using? Was it pure Al? The resistance measurement seems remarkably high.

It's just an ordinary aluminum foil you can buy in grocery stores. I think the surface is quickly coated by aluminum oxide from reaction with oxygen in the air.
The resistance (1-2 Ohm) can be attributed to the connection between the copper wire and the stainless steel plates, also the interface between stainless steel plates and aluminum foil. But it's negligible compared to the resistance of the liquid in the other container, which is connected in series.

[alancalverd]

The ohmic interfaces may well be dictating the nature and quantity of the critical charge carriers, which is why I asked.

What is not clear is why the cans acquire a charge differential in the first instance.

As usual, I am hugely impressed by your experimental ingenuity and dexterity, but not by your critical review of the results.

1. Did you repeat all three scenarios? Were the differences statistically significant?   

2. What happens if you use two sheets of dielectric and only move the top sheet? 

3. What happens if you use two separate sheets of dielectric, one for each can?

Practical electrostatics is much more difficult and prone to all sorts of errors than electrodynamics! 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

1. Did you repeat all three scenarios? Were the differences statistically significant?   

I usually made the measurements prior to recording it. Some measurements need to be aborted and repeated due to simple mishaps like loose connections, or the meter display turning off because of being idle for too long. I didn't make many repetitions because they take considerably long time to stabilize. Running 1 Ampere through the liquid for prolonged duration increases its temperature. Usually the current slowly decreases as the experiment goes on longer. But repetition with the same liquid solution (separated by re-zeroing switch) don't vary that much.