Sidebands
 

On Dec 30, 8:56*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w ...
On Dec 29, 6:41 pm, wrote:

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

In Heaviside's "restatement" something flow along the lines and they do
not
rotate.

Take a glance at:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force
Excelent English. Perfect physics.
S*

What a buffoon.

You haven't a clue what any of your referenced links mean.

--
Jim Pennino

not only that but the reference is an article from a magazine
published years before the completed set of Maxwell's equations were
first published. *During those years there were many changes in the
understanding of electricity and magnetism and EM waves... not that
the initial publication of Maxwell's equations completely converted
those who had different viewpoints, obviously aetherists and adherents
to other old and disproved theories still exist despite 150 years of
experiments that have failed to damage Maxwell's equations.

See at this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Co...Dawes_1920.png

There is shown the magnetic flux (Heaviside). Tell me which physical law
produce it (the hand rule is not a physical law).

Now see at Maxwell's model:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mo...rtex_Model.jpg

There the curent in the solenoid physically rotate the magnetic lines of
force.

So " During those years there were many changes in the understanding of
electricity and magnetism" and the hand rule becomes a physical law.
S*

so you have taken 2 unrelated drawings without the explanatory text to
show what?

The 'hand rule' as you call it is not a physical law, it is a
convention that is used to easily remember relationships expressed in
higher mathematics. There is no magic or physical meaning to it... in
fact both 'hand rules' are used depending on how you learned your
electronics, as long as you are consistent the provide identical
results.

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Dec 30, 8:56 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

So " During those years there were many changes in the understanding of
electricity and magnetism" and the hand rule becomes a physical law.
S*

so you have taken 2 unrelated drawings without the explanatory text to
show what?

Maxwell model (page 304):
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force
"Let the vertical circles V and V represent the molecular vortices of which
the line of magnetic force is the axis. V revolves as the hands of a watch,
and V the opposite way."

"We have thus obtained a point of view from which we may regard the relation
of an electric current to its lines of force as analogous to the relation of
a toothed wheel or rack to wheels which it drives."

The 'hand rule' as you call it is not a physical law, it is a
convention that is used to easily remember relationships expressed in
higher mathematics. There is no magic or physical meaning to it... in
fact both 'hand rules' are used depending on how you learned your
electronics, as long as you are consistent the provide identical
results.

But what kind of force cause the magnetic flux?

In Part IV Maxwell wrote:
"Now it seems natural to suppose that all the direct effects of any cause
which is itself of a longitudinal character, must be them- selves
longitudinal, and that the direct effects of a rotatory cause must be
themselves rotatory. A motion of translation along an axis cannot produce a
rotation about' that axis unless it meets with some special mechanism, like
that of a screw, which con- nects a motion in a given direction along the
axis with a rotation in a given direction round it ; and a motion of
rotation, though it may produce tension along the axis, cannot of itself
produce a current in one direction along the axis rather than the other."

Does Heaviside's mechanism in form of the 'hand rule' "works fine for you."
EM is for kids. Are You?
S*

Sidebands
 

On Dec 30, 3:59*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w ...
On Dec 30, 8:56 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:



So " During those years there were many changes in the understanding of
electricity and magnetism" and the hand rule becomes a physical law.
S*
so you have taken 2 unrelated drawings without the explanatory text to

show what?

Maxwell model (page 304):http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force
"Let the vertical circles V and V represent the molecular vortices of which
the line of magnetic force is the axis. V revolves as the hands of a watch,
and V the opposite way."

"We have thus obtained a point of view from which we may regard the relation
of an electric current to its lines of force as analogous to the relation of
a toothed wheel or rack to wheels which it drives."

The 'hand rule' as you call it is not a physical law, it is a

convention that is used to easily remember relationships expressed in
higher mathematics. *There is no magic or physical meaning to it... in
fact both 'hand rules' are used depending on how you learned your
electronics, as long as you are consistent the provide identical
results.

But what kind of force cause the magnetic flux?

In Part IV Maxwell wrote:
"Now it seems natural to suppose that all the direct effects of any cause
which is itself of a longitudinal character, must be them- selves
longitudinal, and that the direct effects of a rotatory cause must be
themselves rotatory. A motion of translation along an axis cannot produce a
rotation about' that axis unless it meets with some special mechanism, like
that of a screw, which con- nects a motion in a given direction along the
axis with a rotation in a given direction round it ; and a motion of
rotation, though it may produce tension along the axis, cannot of itself
produce a current in one direction along the axis rather than the other."

Does Heaviside's mechanism in form of *the 'hand rule' "works fine for you."
EM is for kids. Are You?
S*

EM is for kids?? i take it that you think EM is too simple and you
must have a more complicated theory? if that is so then i understand
why you are trying to study ancient research, back then there were
many competing theories each with separate complicated descriptions
about rotations and forces... all of those were made simple when
Maxwell combined the essential 4 equations to describe electromagnetic
interactions, add in ohms law and the Lorentz force equation and you
have everything necessary to describe EM effects... Sometimes simple
is best.

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Dec 30, 3:59 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

So " During those years there were many changes in the understanding of
electricity and magnetism" and the hand rule becomes a physical law.
S*
so you have taken 2 unrelated drawings without the explanatory text to

show what?

Maxwell model (page
304):http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force
"Let the vertical circles V and V represent the molecular vortices of
which
the line of magnetic force is the axis. V revolves as the hands of a
watch,
and V the opposite way."

"We have thus obtained a point of view from which we may regard the
relation
of an electric current to its lines of force as analogous to the relation
of
a toothed wheel or rack to wheels which it drives."

The 'hand rule' as you call it is not a physical law, it is a

convention that is used to easily remember relationships expressed in
higher mathematics. There is no magic or physical meaning to it... in
fact both 'hand rules' are used depending on how you learned your
electronics, as long as you are consistent the provide identical
results.

But what kind of force cause the magnetic flux?

In Part IV Maxwell wrote:
"Now it seems natural to suppose that all the direct effects of any cause
which is itself of a longitudinal character, must be them- selves
longitudinal, and that the direct effects of a rotatory cause must be
themselves rotatory. A motion of translation along an axis cannot produce
a
rotation about' that axis unless it meets with some special mechanism,
like
that of a screw, which con- nects a motion in a given direction along the
axis with a rotation in a given direction round it ; and a motion of
rotation, though it may produce tension along the axis, cannot of itself
produce a current in one direction along the axis rather than the other."

Does Heaviside's mechanism in form of the 'hand rule' "works fine for
you."
EM is for kids. Are You?
S*

EM is for kids?? i take it that you think EM is too simple and you
must have a more complicated theory?

EM is is a simple version of Maxwell's model.

if that is so then i understand
why you are trying to study ancient research, back then there were
many competing theories each with separate complicated descriptions
about rotations and forces... all of those were made simple when
Maxwell

It was Heaviside,

combined the essential 4 equations to describe electromagnetic
interactions, add in ohms law and the Lorentz force equation and you
have everything necessary to describe EM effects... Sometimes simple
is best.

Maxwell's model and EM by Heaviside are not simple.
The most simple and the best is the gas (electron) analogy. All waves are
the same.
S*

Sidebands
 

On Dec 30, 4:36*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w ...
On Dec 30, 3:59 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:





So " During those years there were many changes in the understanding of
electricity and magnetism" and the hand rule becomes a physical law.
S*
so you have taken 2 unrelated drawings without the explanatory text to

show what?

Maxwell model (page
304):http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force
"Let the vertical circles V and V represent the molecular vortices of
which
the line of magnetic force is the axis. V revolves as the hands of a
watch,
and V the opposite way."

"We have thus obtained a point of view from which we may regard the
relation
of an electric current to its lines of force as analogous to the relation
of
a toothed wheel or rack to wheels which it drives."

The 'hand rule' as you call it is not a physical law, it is a

convention that is used to easily remember relationships expressed in
higher mathematics. There is no magic or physical meaning to it... in
fact both 'hand rules' are used depending on how you learned your
electronics, as long as you are consistent the provide identical
results.

But what kind of force cause the magnetic flux?

In Part IV Maxwell wrote:
"Now it seems natural to suppose that all the direct effects of any cause
which is itself of a longitudinal character, must be them- selves
longitudinal, and that the direct effects of a rotatory cause must be
themselves rotatory. A motion of translation along an axis cannot produce
a
rotation about' that axis unless it meets with some special mechanism,
like
that of a screw, which con- nects a motion in a given direction along the
axis with a rotation in a given direction round it ; and a motion of
rotation, though it may produce tension along the axis, cannot of itself
produce a current in one direction along the axis rather than the other.."

Does Heaviside's mechanism in form of the 'hand rule' "works fine for
you."
EM is for kids. Are You?
S*
EM is for kids?? *i take it that you think EM is too simple and you

must have a more complicated theory?

EM is is a simple version of Maxwell's model.

if that is so then i understand

why you are trying to study ancient research, back then there were
many competing theories each with separate complicated descriptions
about rotations and forces... all of those were made simple when
Maxwell

It was Heaviside,

combined the essential 4 equations to describe electromagnetic

interactions, add in ohms law and the Lorentz force equation and you
have everything necessary to describe EM effects... Sometimes simple
is best.

Maxwell's model and EM by Heaviside are not simple.
The most simple and the best is the gas (electron) analogy. All waves are
the same.
S*

analogies are not theories, nor are any good at making predictions.
being able to predict things is required of theories, they must be
able to predict things that can be tested to either prove or disprove
the theory. an analogy is just a story trying to explain one thing as
if it were something else, this unfortunately doesn't work very well.

Maxwell's equations are very simple, that is what is best about them.
They have taken the absolute simplest set of equations necessary to
describe all electro-magnetic phenomena.

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...

Maxwell's equations are very simple,

Maxwell wrote 20 equations where were the inertia is and all necessary to
wave propagation in a medium.
They are extremally difficult.

that is what is best about them.
They have taken the absolute simplest set of equations necessary to
describe all electro-magnetic phenomena.

The 4 Heaviside equations describe the hydraulic analogy. It is known as EM.
The DC is like the water. The AC of electrons is not.
S*

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...

Maxwell's equations are very simple,

Maxwell wrote 20 equations where were the inertia is and all necessary to
wave propagation in a medium.
They are extremally difficult.

that is what is best about them.
They have taken the absolute simplest set of equations necessary to
describe all electro-magnetic phenomena.

The 4 Heaviside equations describe the hydraulic analogy. It is known as EM.
The DC is like the water. The AC of electrons is not.
S*

All babbling gibberish.

You never did address the question of what it is you think an "electric wave"
is.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 30, 6:49*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w ...



Maxwell's equations are very simple,

Maxwell wrote 20 equations where were the inertia is and all necessary to
wave propagation in a medium.
They are extremally difficult.

that is what is best about them.
They have taken the absolute simplest set of equations necessary to

describe all electro-magnetic phenomena.

The 4 Heaviside equations describe the hydraulic analogy. It is known as EM.
The DC is like the water. The AC of electrons *is not.
S*

no, the 4 Maxwell equations are all that is necessary for propagation
in vacuum or other medium... its in there, you just have to learn how
to solve them properly. if you are seeing bigger sets of equations
for em waves then you are reading something that is outdated.

you never did give the equation for an 'electric wave'... please
provide that.

Sidebands
 

"K1TTT" Wrote
...

you never did give the equation for an 'electric wave'... please
provide that.

Write: "electric wave equation" and you have 21 000 in 0.2 s.
Happy New Year.
S*

Sidebands
 

On Dec 31, 8:30*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ...

you never did give the equation for an 'electric wave'... please

provide that.

Write: "electric wave equation" and you have 21 000 in 0.2 s.
Happy New Year.
S*

you have a poor search engine, i get 6M hits... and all of them are
either for 'electric field' or 'electromagnetic wave'. provide a
formula or specific reference.