rwsoft

The devil is always in the details. I'll definitely try to get my hands on that book. Also thanks for the thread. I remember reading about this in the paper "Physics Without Einstein" by Dr. Harold Aspden. He gets in depth about the electric and magnetic fields of electrons. I had forgot about this paper... Once again guys, thanks for all the help, it's much appreciated.

Currently I'm mostly interested in the magnetic fields themselves, but will need all aspects of it. More or less it's known that the magnetic field, electric field and the "force field" all are perpendicular to each other. So initially the computer model is the help visualize this. But eventually there's three scenarios I need to test further: First is the easy one, AC/DC current. Here I just need to get myself back up to speed with the math again... The second scenario is the one that got me started on this. With electric dipoles (like batteries), some simple testing shows that the electric field and magnetic field are one and the same, not perpendicular, but I've been wrong before The third is the electron beam. Here, I'm sure that I will have to do my own testing, but initial research shows that the beam itself creates no magnetic field. My research maybe wrong in area or there is an explanation I've yet to discover... If these three ideas hold true, then I'm assuming that all magnetic fields are generated only by dipoles and this is really what I'm after and wish to model. This is the foundation for a little more far fetched theory, but I sure this is not the forum and probably belongs in the forum of "Wannabe Physicists and Tinfoil Hats" Thanks for all the help

Sorry for taking so long to respond, but I just wanted to rethink this and I think I found my source of confusion. My mathematics book explains; give the function [math]w = f(x, z) = x^2 + xz^2[/math] The partial derivation of w with respect to x is obtained when z is held constant is: [math]\frac{\partial w}{\partial x} = 2x + z^2[/math] or with respect to z: [math]\frac{\partial w}{\partial z} = 2xz[/math] So for my model I was attempting with the [math]\frac{\partial A}{\partial t}[/math] as per the text: [math]A = A(x, y, z, t?) = ?[/math] Therefore: [math]\frac{\partial A}{\partial t} = ?[/math] But as Bignose said "That part represents the change of A with respect to time", I believe I lost sight that it's just the change in A I need. Therefore, for my computer models, [math]\frac{\partial A}{\partial t} = A_{current frame} - A_{previous frame}[/math], which would be the change of A for the duration of the frame. I guess in very simple terms, a partial differentiation is a very explicit definition of, in this case, of [math]\delta A[/math]. I been a very long day and I'm very tired so I hope this is making sense...

Hello all I'm new to these forums and hoping for a little help. I'm a software engineer and CNC machinist with a passion for electronics and physics. Currently I studying Maxwell's original treatise on Electromagnetism. I've been working on creating computer models based on his original work, but I'm having problems getting my head around the partial differentiations. Since I've been teaching myself the calculus used in his formulas, first I guess I would like to verify I'm on the right track. First I understand the Hamilton operator as follows: [math]H = -\nabla V[/math] Given the vector/quaternion position P, using the previous formula would solve as: [math]H = -\left(\frac{V}{P_{x}}, \frac{V}{P_{y}}, \frac{V}{P_{z}}\right)[/math] [math]H = -\left(i \frac{V}{P_x} + j \frac{V}{P_y} + k \frac{V}{P_z}\right)[/math] Now for an electric field: [math]E = -\nabla \phi -\frac{\partial A}{\partial t}[/math] Now I'm having serious problems understanding how the solve the [math]\frac{\partial A}{\partial t}[/math] part. Every example/text refers to partial differentiation as a formula and how to derive the resulting formula, but in the above formula I don't understand what the initial formula is to derive the resulting formula from... Is there a good tutorial/example that might explain how this works, I'm sure I just need another way of looking at this to get my head wrapped around it Thanx