[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

These posts have been removed as they contravene both the rules on material published elsewhere and advertising.

Since the moderator deleted the original post, please see this post:
https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/38004-a-new-explanation-of-the-working-principle-of-the-homopolar-motor-the-first-motor-invented-by-michael-faraday/

[Bored chemist]

Is the designation "positive" and "negative" in electricity arbitrary?

Yes.
We even know who made the decision.

[evan_au]

the magnetic spiral HAS A DIRECTION OF MOTION. It is clockwise from the positive to the negative terminal of the battery.

If you have a wire carrying a steady current, a magnetic field will surround the wire.
- The magnetic field forms concentric rings around the wire (the get weaker, the further you move away from the wire).
- The direction of these field lines can be determined from Ampere's right-hand rule
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-hand_rule#Amp%C3%A8re's_right-hand_grip_rule

I see no reason why these concentric circles would form a spiral, if the current is constant.

Another application of Ampere's rule is where the wire forms a spiral, and the rule indicates the direction of the overall magnetic field of the electromagnet.
- The above Wikipedia page illustrates a single-layer winding, which you might think of as a spiral
- But most real transformers and electromagnets have multiple layers of windings. Each alternating layer of wire is laid in opposite directions, back and forth.
- Provided the wire continues in the same direction around the central core.

So I fail to see where the hypothetical spiral magnetic field comes from.
- Unless you are talking about circular polarisation of light
- Which has nothing to do with the magnetic field generated by current through a wire...
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

If you have a wire carrying a steady current, a magnetic field will surround the wire.
- The magnetic field forms concentric rings around the wire

Before I reply to your post, let me ask you something:
What are the experimental evidence that you know of, which actually prove that the magnetic field around a direct current-carrying wire forms circles at an angle of 90 degrees with respect to the wire line?
Moreover, have you done or witnessed such experiments?

[Bored chemist]

What are the experimental evidence that you know of, which actually prove that the magnetic field around a direct current-carrying wire forms circles at an angle of 90 degrees with respect to the wire line?

This

and many others- including Faraday's motor.

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

What are the experimental evidence that you know of, which actually prove that the magnetic field around a direct current-carrying wire forms circles at an angle of 90 degrees with respect to the wire line?

This
YOUTUBE VIDEO

While I am waiting for the reply from @evan_au, I want to ask you something:
Do you REALLY believe that the iron filings circles on a paper are a sufficient proof that the magnetic field around a current-carrying wire is at 90 degrees with respect to the wire line?

[talanum1]

I don't see how it works. It's a DC battery with no coil. Can you use something else (not a screw)?

What provides the field to push against?

[Bored chemist]

Do you REALLY believe that the iron filings circles on a paper are a sufficient proof that the magnetic field around a current-carrying wire is at 90 degrees with respect to the wire line?

No. I have also seen the experiment in real life- at school.
There is plenty of other evidence, not least the overwhelming success of Maxwell's equations.
But you need to consider that the only evidence against it is that you don't think it is true- an you have a history of being wrong about almost everything.

I don't see how it works.

That's a long list...

[talanum1]

The battery causes an electric field in the magnets and I guess the resulting moving electrons can interact with the external magnetic field to produce movement of the magnets. Since the charge comes into the magnet from the side of the magnet a torque is produced.

I predict that the magnets (for the screw version of the demonstration) would not turn if the charge is sent in by the wire right in the middle of the bottom magnet. If this is true it would obviate the rotating magnetic current idea.

[Bored chemist]

Feel free to do the experiment.

[Bored chemist]

While I am waiting for the reply from @evan_au,

In my experience, Evan looks at the evidence.
And the cool thing about evidence- such as that video- is that it doesn't matter who uncovers or presents it.

[Darel2021]

These posts have been removed as they contravene both the rules on material published elsewhere and advertising.

Great mini-essay. I was looking for a topic for my student. He really liked your explanation. Thank you

[Bored chemist]

He really liked your impoverishment.

[Colin2B]

Great mini-essay. I was looking for a topic for my student. He really liked your explanation. Thank you

You really need to be very careful about directing your student to this poster and his explanations. He is consistently wrong on almost everything he says in his threads.
This is new theories section and cannot be relied on to give correct science.

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

Great mini-essay. I was looking for a topic for my student. He really liked your explanation. Thank you

If you want to recommend him/her a really interesting experiment, then tell him/her about the experiments with the transistors described here:
What is electromagnetic induction?

They are very simple but crucial experiments for understanding the electricity and yet, in the form presented, they are unknown to the contemporary "great" science.

You really need to be very careful about directing your student to this poster and his explanations. He is consistently wrong on almost everything he says in his threads.
This is new theories section and cannot be relied on to give correct science.

He really liked your impoverishment.

These two funny guys @Bored chemist and @Colin2B would be perfect ministers for the Ministry of truth in the Orwell's 1984.
The Big Brother would be proud of them.

[Bored chemist]

Why did you quote this bit?

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 11:33:11
He really liked your impoverishment.

[Colin2B]

These two funny guys @Bored chemist and @Colin2B would be perfect ministers for the Ministry of truth in the Orwell's 1984.
The Big Brother would be proud of them.

Oh dear, oh dear.
Never a good idea to draw attention to your posts, someone might start paying more attention to them.

When you signed up to this forum you agreed to abide by the rules, which state that you will not post material/theories that are published elsewhere and you will not advertise.
I notice that this topic has been published on your website and you reference your book, both of which you are advertising. I think we will take a closer look at your posts.

We have no issue with you discussing your ideas, but posting them in this way is against the rules you agreed to.

Regards
Your favourite clown 🤡

[jeffreyH]

Now who would I consider an authoritative source? Would it be a producer of brain farts or a qualified scientist? Tough one!

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

Why did you quote this bit?

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 11:33:11
He really liked your impoverishment.

The Ministry of truth changed the words in the old newspapers and books. You did the same. You change the words of the discussant in the quotation!
Shame on you!

These two funny guys @Bored chemist and @Colin2B would be perfect ministers for the Ministry of truth in the Orwell's 1984.
The Big Brother would be proud of them.

We have no issue with you discussing your ideas, but posting them in this way is against the rules you agreed to.

You call this a discussion???

MODERATOR WARNING:
THIS POST AND OTHERS BY THE SAME POSTER APPEAR TO BE EDUCATIONAL IN NATURE, HOWEVER THEY CONTAIN SERIOUS ERRORS AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES.

You intervene in my posts and change them.
You have no idea what a discussion is.

Now who would I consider an authoritative source? Would it be a producer of brain farts or a qualified scientist? Tough one!

Get lost!

[Bored chemist]

The Ministry of truth changed the words in the old newspapers and books. You did the same. You change the words of the discussant in the quotation!
Shame on you!

No, I did not.

Try thinking harder.

Then you would notice a few things.
First, the guy who posted that mistake thanked me for pointing it out

Please disregard all previous signatures.
The following users thanked this post: Darel2021

And secondly, he edited his post.
Unfortunately you can no longer see that  because the post has been edited again since to remove the quote from you.

So, since you saw fit to lie about me, who should be ashamed?