Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Powered by leedskalnin.com & buzzdev.net
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Suppose we have ABC as a feference gyre in the plane. Then abc is a gyre in the plane with the same rotational orientation. . Any gyre of this depiction such as a’b’c’ for example will add together to form a larger gyre of the same type , even with multiple centres of rotation, which may or may not coalesce into one actual centre but certainly one virtual or implied centre of rotation. . Thus as one naturally expects like things gather together, a mathematical rule based on perception and observation.
It remains to state that unlike things also gather together if they are also the same, and so like each other but unlike a reference object,. Thus ACB is not a gyre like the first so will not combine with the first , but will combine with acb or any a’c’b’ as described above. .
This now enables us to define attraction and repulsion as addittion/ subtraction of like ( attraction) versus like unlike sorting(repulsion)
If now ABC is dominant, that is to say if we could define a unit gyre for ABC
and a physically equivalent unit for ACB and the multiples of the units for ACB exceed those of the multiples for ACB then we define the dominant one as the category or description of any sorting.
Now in the case of poles of magnets the N pole is the dominant of 2 sorted and thus repulsive gyresN and S. . Regardless of how many S gyres are near it anN gyre if in overall dominance defines the category. However, if N is not dominant but equal or subdominant in a region that category will be calledS, either because S is dominant or because N is dominant in an adjacent region.
As you can see the establishing of a consistent and robust structure for mono polar or mono gyric sub elements of gyres is not difficult but not obvious.
Now a similar scheme can be generalised for 3 dimensions, where it is to be noted the gyres to be distinguished are more numerous and not necessarily conical . In addition Johnson shows how these gyres may in fact be intermingled in more complex ways ..
He illustrates the patterns of attraction and repulsion between pairs of magnets to identify that in fact attraction occurs between like monopoles and repulsion between distinguished monopoles , which are by their very repulsion so distinguished. .
We can now go on to consider what induction is and how diamagnetic and paramagnetic induction may be structured in materiality.
In addition we can by and large replace the electron proton models by these magnetic regional structures at all levels.
Amperian currents are a subject I have discussed in detail. In every sense they are a current of tiny magnetic dipoles in Ampéres conception. However he also conceded that the magnetic dipoles may be embedded in a lattice structure. Why he called his subject electrodynamics was because he posited the cause of these tiny magnetic dipoles was some miniscule circuit of dynamic electrostatic charge! Dynamic electrostatic charge is an oxymoron so he favoured electrodynamic.
Of course such a circuit of charge could one level down itself be a current of even tinier magnetic dipoles! The scientists of his day chose to truncate the fractal process at the so called electron.
Of course Ampéres suggestion was based on empirical observation guido g his proposed structural dynamic. Boot and Savot simply assumed a current and drew a rectilinear bix of vectors around a current element. There closed loop integral approach was simpler but less accurate than Ampëres derived results but over time fudge factors compensated for this and Ampéres proposal was ignored until the invention of Lord this electron based on JJThompsons research results but not His corpuscular conclusions. .
The electron had a competitor and.that was Bohrs magnetron, a magnetic version of the data , but highly theoretical and replaced.by electronic equivalents. Dirac reintroduced the monopole magnetron through employing an infinitely long electric solenoid. So however one wanted to deal with the observed magnetic behaviour theoretically electric charge in dynamic status was used and became known as Amperian currents.
It is entirely feasible to start with a tiny magnetic dipole in dynamic spin. Such a permanent magnet spin would create two spin vortices which are a double vortex structure and a dynamic double layer. Such a dynamic structure would be coequal with the notion of electric. charge. These also could be called Amperian currents . Ampére broke away from his researches leaving much to be done to develop his electrodynamic theory.
Modern spintronics, along with NMR now makes huge technological strides based on Amperian currents , and the electron theory overcomplicates the research in this area. Magnets in dynamic spin is actually what is used theoretically, and even the decaying neutron has a spin polarity!
What I am proposing then is a simplification. Asked on magnet spin vortices of dipoles. .
In this book Johnson presents simply the results of using hall sensors to measure magnetic flux intensity which is proportional to the force on a charged particle. . In the theory of magnetic measure the flux intensity is derived from force measurements. . However to apply that measure to a charged particle the particle is defined as moving. So it is an electrodynamic measure. .
To explain the captured results Johnson proposed 2 particles, here avoiding the debate about their charges. The moving charges are assumed to be in the hall sensor itself. In the current theory the electron swings to one side of the sensor depending on the flux density of the applied magnetic field and it’s supposed direction. However now in spintronics 2 electron magnets deflect to both sides of the sensor in what is called the spin Hall effect. The difference in these magnetic potentials on either side is measured as a voltage , positive or negative.
It is not hard to point out how this flies I’m the face of high brow theoretical electric transport theory. The theory is being changed as it should in the light of experimental evidence, but particle physicists still cling to the now called classical interpretations to explain what is being observed. They ignore classical magnetic theory as proposed by Gilbert, as that is a step backwards in their opinion. ,
Let us suppose Ed’s Magnetic current theory .The 2 currents oppose each other intimately in an i tertwini g spiral. Spme of Ed’s individual magnets leave the conductor, new ones enter both from the battery and the environment. . Spintronics leaves the interchange with the environment to the magnetic spin orientation and instead of the opposing spiral they have a combined electron flow of the 2 spin orientations.
It sounds different, looks different but is precisely the same.
So now we use this spin vortex to measure a supposed flux from a permanent magnet. What we measure is on one side the individual magnets are leaving the sensor on one side predominantly , but on the other side the sensor switches the other way round. . We find in the permanent magnet 2 different regions juxtaposed. 2 opposing individual magnet concentrations , or equivalently 2 regions where dipole orientation is switched. This is again found at the so called opposite pole, but switched round, .
Straight away we know these regions are in dynamic motion because Ed’s electric theory presupposes this, and we find they are in vorticular motion. .
So far so good. But what we all missed is that like poles attract and opposite poles repel!
Ed’s theory actually hints at this because the individual magnets are in dynamic motion , not collected into a static neutral layer.
One way or another modern ideas are corresponding to Ed’s conclusions based on his simple research methods.
However Howard Johnson went an important step further: he showed how to use these vortex spins to drive magnetic motors and so dynamos . This technology is already available. Spintronics is using it in electronic switching and memory devices and Searle avionics is using it in developing flying structures.
Tesla said we would learn how to hook our machines to the very wheelworks of the universe. All that stops us is the greed of men and possibly aliens!
The study of magnets at the crystall structure level was advanced by a need for stronger and more resistant magnets that retained more of their magnetic induction. Domain walls came u dear scrutiny and methods of measuring the magnetic moments in a surface were devised. Both Neels and Bloch studied the magnetic moments in domainwalls.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_wall_(magnetism)
His research into nuclear magnetism earned him a Nobel prize and belies any influence by Ed’s course in magnetism. It also belies any influence by Johnson’s work. However Johnson may well have been influenced by Ed and certainly kept abreast of developments in magnetism.
It is clear that all researchers at all levels failed to reinvestigate the bar magnet or the magnetic poles.
Here the Imhotep team show the double vortices at each pole. In addition they show attraction occurs in straight lines.
Johnson not only measured these vectors but provides a picture of how attraction gives pairing of the measurements ,compression of the paired measured regions into highly curvilinear and parallel directions and a lowering of the measured field intensities.
However Ed’s experiment while showing repulsion as a torque effect does not indicate what Johnson measured: an increased vortex spin much stronger than the sum of the 2 vortex doubles between the 2 opposing poles.
Here the Imhotep team misunderstand a puzzling experiment. A NS dipole is established in the earths magnetic field. The North Pole of a bar magnet will actually seek south and vice versa. However a compass needle will have the red marked on the South Pole. Ed’s hanging magnets are true north( and thus south seeking) and true south, true north is placed to the north hanging down and true south 3” to the south. Now the North Pole is brought up to the North Pole and the south to the south. By common opinion the hanging bar magnets should swing away in parallel. .in stead they swing closer together. .
So we beefed up each pole and they then attracted each other?
So we do the reverse and the hanging magnets now swing apart! We diminished the pole strengths so why did they influence each other? They did not. The north hanging magnet has now been induced into a South Pole and now seeks north! Similarly the previous experiment induced a greater North Pole and the hanging magnet now seeks south.
Because the hanging magnets return to vertical when the horshoe magnet is removed we can conclude every pole has a double magnetisation beefed up under induction so that a North makes North more powerful and south induces more south. But wait that actually means like polarities specifically the north elements actually cooperate and this is attraction, similarly for the south. So what is repulsion? Ed does not appear to answer that question but this experiment suggests north and south actually repel each other!
This is not easy to think even when the evidence is staring one in the face. Here Howard Johnson having pointed it out, measures a repulsion gap and shows a vortex of increased kinetic energy, using his momentum concepts , whereas in the attraction space the kinetic energy is reduced dramatically and a very lineal contraction band is measured, collapsing the vortices into flat pancakes of paired motions.
Howard Jog son confirmed Ed’s neutral zone showed a cross shaped geometry. . However where the vortices exited the plane of measurement the repulsion was evident, but where the vortices came in it became evident that dominant like vortices bridged or bonded together the bond squeezed by the subdominant vorticesattdmpting to bond.
Where does this leave the interpretations of Bloch and Neél and most of us? It leaves us reinterpreting domain walls in this light, reimagining diamagnetic polarity and how a so called Electric field could possibly orient magnetic dipole moments.
It is challenging to u derstand domain walls as the materiL on a different phase. And yet any substance is a colloidL mixture of the material in different phases between highly viscous phases to very low viscosity plasma phases. Research is showing that careful phase deposition of materials can control and pin phase changes in domain walls, and in particular doping materials with a plasma of a suitable other material can lock in coherent magnetic orientation
All 4 phases exist in a substance at once and in a crystalline structure organic or otherwise the plastic phase is likely to be in the domain walls of a material.
We ignored so much of the behaviour of lodestone and focussed on its North seeking torque.. later collecting all the information to hand Sir William Gilbert set out his magnetic theory and philosophy in De Magnete. He focussed on the virginity of what came to be known as poles, that is how intense or strong they were in attracting magnetic materials. He did not link in the torque on the lodestone crystal. Finally he posited the earth as a bar magnet with a north and South Pole. He did not think about the consequences of his theory. The North Pole is defined by its torque behaviour, so he has north poles attracting north poles. . However everyone else seems to think this is wrong, and promptly had south attract north..
Somebody decided opposites attract, and imposed that on magnetic behaviour when Gilbert essentially defined the North poles rotating together into alignment
Well when you take 2 aligned north poles and place them together they repel each other, and in fact they torque so that south is adjacent to and attracted to north. . What is going on locally that is messing up our naming scheme for magnetic poles?
In the meantime the magnetic dipole moment was defined as a mathematical torque measure. The vector presentation was chosen so as to define the direction as from north to south and perpendicular to a supposed current. However the torque or spin is not the same as turning the North Pole to face north , it is a defined field line direction orthogonal to a supposed axial spin of a quantum object, proton or electron.
So really magnetic dipole moment adds to the confusion because it is not saying a solenoid will point north in the earths magnetic field, only what is defined as the local North Pole.
You see here Bozeman relates the general torque notion to a compass behaviour, but that behaviour turns the named South Pole towards the named North Pole , by attraction. Repulsion is ignored in all such definitions.
The important thing is consistency right? Well that is why we ignored the double vortex spins at both poles and the binding structure of those spins.
The North Pole elements of a pole that is a vortex ABC in a plane is attracted to the North Pole element of the earth . But when 2 north poles , in common speak, are brought together the South Pole element compete for dominance and create a huge dynamic vortex instability, resulting in repulsion around, in a vortex torque around the instability. . Stability only comes where the dominant
Ole element can link up with its fellow and effectively force the subdominant Pole element into a stable separated position.
It is important to realise these double vortices are dipoles but are in dynamic repulsion and a magnetic dipole moment does not describe their dynamic.
The researcher who discussed Howard Johnson’s book showed how a dipole moment does not model what was observed. To model it he had to use parallel and anti parallel currents and then calculate the equipotential voltages around such currents. All again very confusing if you stick to the electron current model. .
The simplification Ed proposed is 2 magnetic currents that are vortices that twist by or through each other and are not constrained to stay within the boundaries of the material. . In spintronics or even spin orbital magnetic moments these vortices are completely ignored and so missing in the design process of electronics. The result is we get excessive heating in electronic materials due to these ignored vortex interactions.
In his gate designs Johnson takes care to explain how to short out unwanted spin vortices, and so to make use of the desired spin directions in a way thar minimises the energy in the gap between conventional poles.
It is important also to note that the anisotropic of magnetic dipoles relates directly to these ignored spin vortices.
What remains to be explored is diamagnetic ehaviour in certain materials on the right of the periodic table format.
So now I know the magnetic moment is a torque and really that torque is the force on a supposed current moving in its own generated magnetic field in interaction with an external magnetic field I can re-emphasise that the field lines are torque lines not force lines. You only get force lines by ignoring the magnetic dipole. I could say they are magnetic moment lines showing the resultant magnetic dipole moment at any given point.
So I know the Hall effect is measuring the magnetic dipole torqu intensity at any given point. I could say it measures how much torsion it is inducing in the Hall element and that element is piezo electric. . That means the vortex spin Johnson mapped is a torque resultant map. . He presented a simplified depiction of the vortex spins , enough to make design decisions more accessible. You will note he presents only 2 d contour maps and their equivalent topological maps.
The three dimensional representations generated on the computer screen and photographed reveal the torque vortices and show how different they are to the accepted unlike pole elements. These arrangements form the different types of domain walls and are affected by phases of impriB torque field maps calculated as above. The complex surfaces of these vortex spin s are trochoidally dynamic , which means the interactions for attraction and repulsion will be complex, The observed measurements indicate constructive and destructive superposition or interference. . Helps to explain why induction does not appear to alter the material structure while altering the vortex spin aggregate in the crystalline structure organic or inotganiv..
The behaviour of diamagnetic material now becomes accessible. . In those materials the torque gyroscopy is out of phase by some phase difference and the dominant vortex spin structures the geometry to its advantage which rea,,y flops the vortex structures through a quarter turn so the induced poles are dominated by the repulsion of unlike vortex spins.
These arrangements are found in domain walls where the presence of phase impurities can pin a domain wall to make it very easy to change.[ low coercivity
The polarity influenced by SPIN or VuLOSITY and direction.
This spin also influenced by the wobble of the earth increasing the total strength of the current.
That current or magnetic field then instead of being an oval or loop flops back over itself in the form of a figure eight. And according to Maxwell cannot cross or contact itself the same as his electric theory. Producing an interruption of that existing field. Resulting in a short or very small nuclear explosion or fission. Thus breaking the space between the positive and the negative. Or in fact splitting the atom of the field or current. In this process a small amount of force is released and joins passed splittings and result in gravity.
The gyroscope suggests that rotating counter clock wise reduces the pull and strength of gravity.
Therefore directional spin and velocity produce by way of central force and spin create polarity. The speed of velocity dictates the end strength of the circuit. The faster the spin the greater the strength.
Once the velocity reaches a certain speed it changes polarity. And the whole system is reversed.
Like charges push apart and unlike charges attract.
This effect eventually effects the nucleus of the atom. causing it to increase spin and direction then effecting the proton and electron. Resulting in effect applied to local environment. Again resulting in a specific polarity. The speed of the velocity has yet to be determined but I would suggest the speed of light. Once that speed has been reached Leedskalins reversal of polarity exists!
As there are many protons and electrons floating about there must be many reveals that take place.
How do u establish the polarity of anything??
Thank you.
j
The discovery by Arago of magnetic behaviour in a non magnetic disc rotating near a magnetic object lead to many consequences . First it lead Lenz to formulate a law of induction which modified Faradays prior law. Then it lead more careful researchers to recognise a charge differential between the centre of the disc and the edge during rotation, which lead to the concept of a generator. It was never compared to the Wimhurst generator in those days but it should be recognised equivalent under the larger principle of tribomsgnetic behaviours. Faraday and others investigated the notion of diamagnetic polarity as a consequence of Lenz observations and Ampères law of currents. It was shown that all materials are susceptible to magnetic induction. However certain materials iron cobalt and Nickel were permeable to an extraordinary extent. It was conceived as environmental magnetic flux soaking into these materials .
Of those that were susceptible some showed what came to be proven as diamagnetic polarity, and like Aragos disc opposed the direction of magnetic induction in ferromagnetic materials : Those that showed parallel tendencies to ferromagnetic induction were called paramagnetic .
On another track researchers into Aragos disc phenomenon realised that reversing the homopolar generator by applying a current between the centre and the edge created a homopolar motor. Decades later Hall realised that applying a current to a semi conductor but diamagnetic material induced by a magnet pole would generate a measurable side voltage,as if the material was twisting in the magnetic field producing piezzo electricity.
During that time magnets became downgraded to current loops and research on the magnetic field structure stopped . It was not until Ed Leedskalnin that magnetic theory was revived and not until Howard Johnson that Eds findings were richly corroborated. But Ed did not describe diamagnetic polarity nor did Johnson. However the electronic characterisation of diamagnetic materials was completed and taught as fact.
I have to recant the particle theory for a rotational dynamic fluid theory . Vortices become the primitive structures but trochoidal vortices , dynamics unfamiliar to all but a few.
Howard Johnson’s magnetic poles as double vortices model. With like vortices attracting and unlike repelling provides a direct link to diamagnetic polarity in materiality and itsbrelation to the magnetic mode called electric charge and electric current.
Further NMR and all magnetic behaviours can be understood by his model including chemical bonding and nuclear fusion and fission . It explains why the so called neutron is unstable and why hot bodies like the sun are intensely magnetic.
Finally gravity is a demonstrable mode of magnetism in which induced magnets cling to one another when in a larger magnetic field .
Finally, all of us are taught that B field torque lines and surfaces do not intersect by definition. Some lame two tangents at a point excuse is given. However these points of intersection do happen in physicality. They are places where the diamagnetic field lines pass through. . The dominant torque surface is usually found around ferromagnetic materials where the much weaker diamagnetic domain wall field is barely apparent. However in induced diamagnetism the torque lines trace out the domain wall field lines in a ferromagnetic torque field. Similarly in an induced paramagnetic torquefield a diamagnetic torque field will also be induced due to the diamagnetic domain walls in that substance.
In a diamagnetic material it is of course the induced paramagnetic torque lines that will cross the induced diamagnetic ones. Let us leave the descriptors of torque lines and torque surfaces and use Howard R Johnson’s double vortex spin model, then we see that the dominant vortex cuts across 2 subdominant anti vortices, in a diamagnetic material the structure is rotated through a quarter turn during the induction stage .
A research question is how is this double vortex more stable than a double layer structure implied by our NS nomenclature? I suspect it has to do with rotational dynamics in bounded conditions. We can see how what we call solid is just a highly viscous structured fluid where the Rayleigh Love waves at the surface form regular patterns due to phase alignment/constructive interference/ superpositioning.
Again the interaction of dynamic vortex spins surprises us because rotation is so drummed out of us!
Also when we include the anisotropic of material we can understand why some diamagnetic materials are better at carrying diamagnetic current or torsion waves than others, and why the drawing and rolling of copper contributes to its electrical properties as current wave guides.
Here we see for closed systems the vortex dynamics always places the same vortex diagonally opposite with opposing spin tangents which signify a resultant attraction, while the anti vortex can be rotated near to the vortex but with increasing repulsion the closer they get
The quarter turn position is the next stable position for the vortices in a closed periodic boundary whether vortex or anti vortex.
Again when like vortices interact they can form stable bonds or unstable bonds. Providing the unstable bond is guided by a corrective repulsion the bond behaves stably and exhibits attraction and impressive compressive symmetry and rectilinear lineal regularity
https://youtu.be/
Finally we see here how a dipole identified actually in dynamic may assume 4 modes, but dominance means we are aware of only2. And in fact those 4 modes can be seen as 2 double combinations or vortices.
Just to show how random measurements or regular measurements on a grid when overlapped with another set of measurements on the same grid and even a third on the same grid will most likely reveal or be interpretable as a vortex spin curvilinear vector.
All classical crystal symmetry missed this point due to assuming perfect symmetry exists in natural dynamical structures.
In short the aether fluid I presume and define as in perpetual trochoidal dynamic motion which we perceive as magnetic and diamagnetic behaviour.
It is a sound basis to all theoretical descriptions to assume a Magnetic universe means a rotationally dynamic universe.
Here you will find an independent assessment of Howard's magnetic devices, plus his defence and explanation of his ideas and investigations.
Although
H he presents himself in academically acceptable terms he does moot the possibility of an as yet undiscovered particle interaction or even. New particle to explain magnetic behaviour.
As in the past ith Maxwell, vortices are the favourite initial device of explanation, but then due to scientific browbeating a particle explanation is easily trotted out to appease the particle physicists who gate keep the o called fundamental laws of physics. .
A fluid dynamic explanation is not given or attempted, but a useful mathematical assay is attempted, although woefully inadequate.
We see how the estBlished paradigm does not allow fresh thinking but parsimonious lay shapes the new ideas into its own image of Reality and dynamics. . As a result of this strangle hold quantum and relativistic mechanics a are at loggerheads at the level of the supporters of each and string theory is nowhere yet taken as a serious technological touchstone. So once again vortex dynamics, especially as I proved by Claes Joh son et, al play no role in explaining or further researching this phenomenon.
Howard Johnson by the late stage of his research attempted to hook his ideas onto spintronics and superconductivity at room temperature , even though his background in atomic research initially made him think in terms of some new particle, not unlike the fatuous Higgs Boson. . Of course theoretical particle physicists do not need a new particle to explain so called electromagnetism and so he did not gain any interest by that pitch!
The conventional electromagnetic engineer attempts to explain the observations using conventional north and south poles and fails, but does note yjat non linear fields and slight boundary condition variations hold a promise of unravelling this puzzling behaviour,.
Whereas we are taught the naive primitive that opposites tract and likes repel , a sufficiently vague and counter intuitive principle to found magneto dynamics on, Howard's careful measurements reveal that principe to be in error. . And yet an attempted explanation on that basis served to guide th researcher to investigate variation in gap spacings and " complex" interactions as a possible resolution path.
The difficulty I have is in always remembering that trochoidal dynamics is barely understood and yet potentially so simple an explanatory path.
The torque lines of force, replacing Farradays magnetic tubes of force , do not readily admit a hydraulic pressure explanation for repulsion or an elastic contraction for attraction. In fact they eschew such mechanical thinking for abstract field interactions, we are taught to see these lines as lines of torque force created by the interaction of a flux from north identified and individual Poe to the equivalent south andbthnmwithin th material from south to north. . But apart from that picture we tend to deal only with the extenalB field as interacting and having a magnetic dipole moment. The axial field has no existing dipole moment, the angle being 0 so the charge force/ induction is purely related to how far away the poles are along the axis.
And which defined direction the charge force/ induction is acting.
We add an additional rule: parallel axial lines ina real magnet or solenoid do not cross. What does this mean?
It means we can not calculate the densely packed and assumed parallel structure of the flux within a magnet. We have no idea of how that structure comes to be due to field interactions. . We also have no idea how the field lines drfy Newtons first law and circulate.
We are mislead if we are taught that Newton discovered all things moved in straight lines. Newton taught all things move in curvilineal arcs ASIF deflected from a line tangent to that motion by some environmental pressure/ impulse/ urge in addition to that urge we might identify as the principal director/ initiator of motion under observation. He also was at pains to remind the researcher of the inertial equi Librium background against which all perceived motion moved relativistic ally. . Absolute time is the o ly difference between Newton and Einstein. It is the effect of reletavistic time on our perceptions that Einstein addresses.
So we see Boscovich and all classical Newtonian andvEinsteinintheoretical physicists and mechanics start from a rotationa ly dynamic AETHER.
The fluid dynamics of such an aether were too complex for Newtonto approximate, and it is only through numerical modelling that we have displayed the dynamic behaviour and structure of such trochoidal dynamics.
So when Howard ensured the torque surfaces around a permanent magnet he revealed another view of the dynamics which theorists do not want to accept. First he presented the data in 2 forms not helpful to the observer but designed to challenge perceived views. Seconfpdly he present computer graphics of the data as a 3d coloured image , joining the data points by vector lines which had no meaning but lead the eye to see vortices.
It is without douby easy to see vortex patterns in layers measured by the probe, it is harder to see those patterns as representing particle motions, which Howard initially advances as a possible interpretation. The equipotential contour maps are not new and reveal an unexpected structure at the poles, but do not suggest spin but shaping. However Howard measured in all 3 directions over a 90 minute period and found the other equipotential measurements and their shaping. Putting it all together required an assumption Howard took the force component assumption rather than the torque component assumption. Thereby he interpreted the combined results as a spin force matrix through which a particle with magnetic properties would be guided to spin..
The torque interpretation is more complex. A magnetic dipole would find itself being oriented in a complex vorticular structure with a necessary motion which comes from modifying the dipoles own intrinsic motion. .
The shaping will guide any intrinsic motion but not necessarily cause any motion beyond torque, we see this in iron filings where unless the paper is tapped the iron filings do not orient themselves fully. An external or intrinsic motion is apparently needed to reveal the vortex shaping.
However now with Ferro fluids we see that more than shaping occurs because the universal attractive force of pulse toward the vortex structures of whatever type exists and so indeed a vortex spin motion is affected on materials that are attracted or pushed in this manner. But we also observe a competition between the vortices which separates the particles by space nd orientation, it is this partionnthat we have not understood as the coexistent repulsive force.
The torque between the poles has bern solely characterised by attraction rather than as a combination of attractive and repulsive curvilineal force vectors.
The repulsion establishes the structural boundaries of the vorticesv within the material but does not become apparent outside the material until poles are brought together. . How do we explain the repulsion dynamic?
Until now we see the partition between the poles under attraction as attractive, but the probe and iron filings show tha a fine grain structural organisation is happening in which external materials are being paired together, this pairing can be described as fine grain attraction or compaction in which material is attracted not only to a pole but also together, we see it as a force which is dependent on the volume of the material attracted and pushed" very fine material unable to generate a force to overcome vinous impedance in the fluid remains suspended but oriented as gravity slowly moves it down.
The repulsion establishes the structural boundaries of the vorticesv within the material but does not become apparent outside the material until poles are brought together. . How do we explain the repulsion dynamic?
Until now we see the partition between the poles under attraction as attractive, but the probe and iron filings show tha a fine grain structural organisation is happening in which external materials are being paired together, this pairing can be described as fine grain attraction or compaction in which material is attracted not only to a pole but also together, we see it as a force which is dependent on the volume of the material attracted and pushed" very fine material unable to generate a force to overcome vinous impedance in the fluid remains suspended but oriented as gravity slowly moves it down. The vortex dynàmic explains this torque behaviour very well as we assume an attractive centripetal force acting toward each vortex centre, but we must also asummme an active centripetal ly Repulsive force( centrifugal being another description of a force that acts towards and defines a centre) It is this repulsive force that acts centripetal ly that we ignore and find confusing when like poles are brought together
Material is universally attracted and repelled centripetal ly. The result is a torque field with an interestingly complex interaction.
The question is how does one action come to dominate over the other in material situations and is it a characteristic of elemental differences and diamagnetic behaviours and properties at various amplitudes, frequencies and phases of a material rotational dynamic ?
Howard Johnson revealed ordering and pairing and compaction occuring in contraction whereas increased vorticular activit and expansion occurs in repulsion. This is where I seek to further model the trochoidal dynamics to explain the magnetic behaviours observed , based on like vortices attracting and aggregating together while unlike ones repel in materials and how that behaviour expresses itself across an impedance phase boundary between different media
In a p,and we can apprehend a dipole as two couterotating circular spiral motions that always move together as a system ,
So as Maxwell pointed out two meshing gear wheels or an idler wheel are a mechanical necessity for smooth rotation and transmission of power through a space and or medium.
I
When we consider a 3 dimensional dipole we can extend the counter rotating vortices all the way till they join up into a vortex loop or semi loop. . Even without a loop connection the vortices still move together as a system.
Now studying such vortex systems as dipoles can give insight into how dipoles interact in a dipole field .
Firstly Howard Johnson reveals a double dipole system. It is not clear yet if the double dipole extends through or round the magnet form or geometry as only one view is pets enter figuratively and the photos are not clearly identified. In the research article mention was made of the superconductor state in which all the fields become aligned and magnetic power is at its maximum. Thus vortex dynamics must capture this.
It would appear that when a vortex is dominant it is as if the vortex is connected in the middle of the external vortex loop or paired vortices. The vortices arranged thmselves to pass in side one another.
How does a pair of such vortex double loops interact?
The conceptual primitive for a bar magnet as revealed by Howard Johnson’s measurements
The magnet is waved away, the magnetic influence is waved away , the motor is fingered one way and now palmed away and the generator is is a knuckle headed mess🤗
We can’t escape the confusion taught as electro magnetism.
What is static in electro statics? The charge is not static . The charge was not even known so the electron was invented and made too small to worry about. Nowadays we worry about it a lot!
Then we say surprised : the magnetic pole is like a charge in electrostatics, and it too is static when it is clearly not. But now we make the electron dynamic so we can explain a static magnetic dipole. . Ampére called for a name change at least: let us recognise the dynamism! But we won’t go back and look at the fundamentals, the vortex dynamics.
We know a lot more about fluid dynamics , we know a lot more about fundamental rotational interactions but our current mush mash and hand waving is good enough for public education. .
Admittedly rotational dynamics is confusing if all you are taught is 2 dimensional thinking. But in 3 dimensions a vortex ring gives us a fluid dynamic dipole with attractive and repulsive forces locked in. The study should be how the two force types become dominant in certain close regions to a pole , and what precisely is the pole structure Howard Johnson measured .
Today we finally admit to spin dynamics and spin orbitalss
First we defined a field of points in polar coordinates r,ø,æ . Then we defined a field intensity at each point B(r,ø,æ), then we defined a vector field
BOn that B intensity field and then we got smug.Howard Johnson came and mapped and measured the field and it is not how we defined it!
Hey but in our smugness or greed we do not want to upset the applecart.
Our differential expressions stop short of the third differential the variation of acceleration with time or general rotational dynamics. , our vectors are lineal not curvilineal expressed in quaternions form as rotational spiral vectors not imaginary operators,
We teach opposites as attracting instead of like attracting like because we can’t see the vertical motion joining up outside the plane of observation in the z axis planes. In those planes the rotation of opposites in the xy plane become the same and attract where the opposites repel and push the rotations of like apart in the xy plane
We don’t pay attention to Claes Johnson’s and Johann Hoffman’s correction to vortex kinematic. . We just muddle through .
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241051220_Mathematical_Theory_of_Flight
Streamline vortices create forces in the orthogonal planes to the streamline plane.
http://claesjohnson.blogspot.com/2012/08/aiaa-rejects-new-theory-of-flight.html
https://secretofflight.wordpress.com/
Still explaining the new ideas, which are more significant to mathematical modelling than to those who accumulate engineering expertise by trial and error. Nevertheless by adopting this theory practical research and design experiments can be more efficiently formulated with a higher success rate.
https://secretofflight.wordpress.com/applications/
It also may explain magnetic attraction and repulsion
The vortex theory of Helmholtz and Kelvin leads to physically impossible and not observed perturbations because viscosity is ignored. For a magnet the vortices pass through layers of differing viscosity as characterizing the magnetic materials ( para, dia,ferro)with polar vortices being the impedance effect.
Now Helmholtz proved a theorem that vortices either loop together their ends or they terminate in a boundary. This boundary can occur anywhere including within a fluid where the medium changes , that is where impedance occurs. Within a medium his other theorem states a uniform strength or torque along a vortex tube. .however where that tube crosses a boundary different torques will be evident and non uniform. His 3rd law or theorem means vortices give rise to totatiin and vortices. A lineal velocity requires a vortex to bend into a rotation . Similarly if two or more vortices counteract a velocity will remain irritational.
http://www.nada.kth.se/~cgjoh/ambsflying.pdf
The state of super conductivity today . One of the noticeable things is the reliance on the electron and the indistinct notion of magnetic flux. Although he used the term vortices it was descriptive not performative.
Here in more detail the difficulties are layer out. Quantum flux without a flux loop , Cooper pairing , all reminiscent of 3D ring vortex behaviour.
Instead of defining magnetism by electron orbital disposition , understand vortex ring interactions.
The Meitner effect is where magnetic induction is supersaturated
I can understand why Howard suggested permanent magnets are room temperature superconductors.. we see here how a Masing process dumps magnetic current into these materials.. we see r
The care taken regarding the impedance boundary and how that pins the vortices in the permanent magnet prepared structure.. care is taken to emphasise the lattice structure so domain walls are as regular as possible, achieved by the sintering process.
. These domains are cavities that are then Mased to create a magnetic amplified stimulated emission of magnetic radiation, or a magnetic dipole vortex. .
In theory they all depict one dipole, but in practice 2 dipoles exist due to the Masing cavity reflecting the Masing current or wave at each impedance boundary.
In a sense we see how this occurs. The dominant pulse is directed, but it also spreads to the orthogonal boubpndary where it is also reflected. We end up with a dominant nort south vortex and a subdominant south north vortex. The stability of this system does depend on material characteristics, viscosity and relaxation time being the 2 main ones. .
A magnet at resonance frequencies for the material will form these 3 dimensional Chladini structures which are vortices. Why they do not dissipate is due to magnetic behaviour being the fundamental universal or cosmic behaviour.
We should know by now that super conductivity is a magnetic phenomenon. When Meitner observed vortex shedding around a super conducting block he failed to refer to diamagnetic polarity. Diamagnetic polarity is as far as we know induced by the Masing process, and so is best described as a secondary vortex structure formed by orthogonal reflection and having a weaker interaction with rage dominant vortex. Some materials noticeably twist the Masing Pulse through this quarter turn. (Faraday noticed this in certain crystals).
It is so much easier to skip electrons and just deal with magnetic currents or vortices.
In this article by David Go,ding on page 250 I find experimental evidence for diamagnetism being nit only a domain wall boundary phenomenon but also a crystal lattice boundary wall phenomenon. On page 260 he shows how Faraday and his contemporaries carefully searched for explanatory general principles. To be sure his intuition and methodology lead him to keep a circumspect and fluid mental processing waiting in many senses for The power of Nature to reveal itself.
The explanation of the field concept is best given by reading this discussion but here for my purposes I define it as a topological region, into which a vector reference frame has been introduced, and which vectors reference in and of themselves extensions which I call points. .assigned to each point is a scalar value which signifies some physical quantity. Against these static vector and scalar pairs another vector set is constructive and constructed showing the inter relationships between every point. Having grasped that description of a field, understand that a dynamic field is one in school the scalars vary with a time step and so the interelating vectors vary according to a sometimes perceptible and sensible pattern and often a mysterious pattern
Now such a dynamic field may have a perceptible physical vector field associated in regards to motion of independent regions in and of space wnjch have their own local absolute reference vector frame : in regard to displacement, velocity, acceleration and finally rotation control,
In such a dynamic association to the underlying field the motion of any object can be recorded video/ holographic movie frame. From such frames an artist can construct a drawn arc which line represents a line of motion or movement
Faraday was given these lines of movement in a dynamic field as representing a static standing pattern of motion.
However this is better described as a snapshot of a perpetually dynamic system.
Faraday ETHZ al adopted a principle of least action. This is a guide to Directing and structuring the mountains of point data we as humans and our measuring instruments can collect. It gives direction and structure of arrangement in geometrical terms and in minimums of displacement, velocity and acceleration, work and power. . It guides also in choosing the most probable outcome and the most statistically common expectation. .
Faraday careful method meant he considered behaviours in interaction and NOT in mathematical abstraction. Thus as Hermann Grassmann for o e pointed out, the Dialectic approach , particularly that of Hegel, starts with the worst possible description and refines it by addition of the least possible addition until a satisfactory explanation is achieved for all the data.. .
However, very few scientists driven by an urge for academic prestige adopt this approach. Faraday was noted for his adherence to this incremental and dialectical approach guided by intuition and suspicious of Mathematical depiction.
Mathematical physics replaces empirical observation and measurement by abstracted general processes of accounting. . As such it cherry picks what fits the abstracted process and interpolates what has not been measured and extrapolates what can not be measured. If such a created process fits measurements well enough and predicts measurements well enough it is Magically changed from a human devised measurement process into A Law Of Nature😂😂😂
However, Faraday et al really believed they were in communication with Natures God by their intuitions and waited upon revelations that would clarify their understandings and procedures. Thus when Maxwell took time and considerable effort to model Faradays experimental measurements by higher mathematical methods, he fell out with Faraday or rather Faraday fell out with him because of his insistence that least action meant STRAIGGT line action!!
It is important to note and note it very well, that the natural line of least action is by all accounts a CURVE in which the least time is taken to accomplish any displacement.
That curves should result in straight line physical arrangements and flat planar surfaces seems illogical, but intuitively correct and satisfying. . It is the insistence on straight line approximations without the tangential aspect of their nature to a “true” curve so to speak( for it may be that such a curve is a dynamic instance of an evolving dynamic surface within a perpetually changing volume) that confounds the study of magnetic behaviours.
It was by intuition that Faraday strove to prove the universal power he suspected as having 2 aspects: one electrostatic and the other magnetostatic, in which his intuitive lines of force constituted the Dynamic field of influence around a material point. Ultimately he came to declare the Boscovich Atom as the ideal, because all materiality though attachable to some arbitrary points by our perception may indeed be the playing out of the interactions of these dynamic lines of of force or as he intuited divine powers in action taking the least and most ecomical action.
It must also be pointed out that conductivity and currents were not ascribed to electron motions and freedoms but to the observed power of materials to guide and concentrate powers. . Thus a so called line of electrostatic force ass JJ Thompson well understood was a tube of concentrated and guided power or influence which particularly concentrated and was guided by what were called material atoms and molecules, these being representatives of static materiality while the tubes themselves being the dynamic agency of action, guidance and indication of least action. As such they were a human device to enable a sensible directing, ordering and structuring of an influence in a sphere about the material or point of Local interest. . These attributes later came to define the basic principles and function of what was called a field, thought always in those days as a spherical field of influence around a point of interest. It’s later mathematical or rather formulaic representation is meaningless without these underpinning principles and intuitions. Now an Aether in this regard be it spiritual or material is not a field in this Faraday sense, but whatever the extent of such an aether we may introduce into it location points around which we may adduce a Faraday field based on observed behaviours of materiality in Faraday tubes of Force .
Finally I might add that while Faraday had great respect for electrostatics and sought to establish magneto statics I personally intuit a magnetodynamic as being fundamental , from which in keeping with observation and Faraday I adduce Tubes of magnetic force conducted by Materiality in all its finest rarefaction, or as we now say,PLASMA state.
I found that Faraday rejected the diamagnetic boundary plane related to the optical axis in crystals as diamagnetic. However I was aware of Tyndales demonstration of diamagnetic polarity and so realised he had missed a clue. Later he was able to demonstrate that diamagnetic material conducted the normal lines of force away from penetrating and concentrating in itself, much like superconducting material does at the critical temperature. . We therefore have 2 line configurations. The paramagnetic and ferromagnetic goi g through the material, the diamagnetic going round the material or diverted out of the material. .
Note also My description of diamagnetism being the mode of electric current in a generator is similar to Faradays.