Motional EMF

[studiot]

10 hours ago, icester said:

 

I assume this was a muffed up response to my post, not one of Strange's many.

 

I think the solution to your issue lies in the geometry of your setup, which is still not clear to me despite the excellent photos.

I would like to take you back a step to start with a simpler situation.

We live in a three dimensional world, but conside a two dimensional magnetic field uniform and parallel to the x axis, and lying in the xy plane.

Consider also a wire in this field.

The wire can be oriented parallel to the field, or perpendicular to it in two further ways, making three in all.

Now consider relative translation between the wire and the field (the field moving one way or the wire moving the other)

This can occur parallel to each of three axes.

Thus we have a total of 3 x 3 = 9 possible different orientations to consider.

How many of these will give rise to an EMF?

Now compare this list with the orientation of your magnetic field and your wire.

Edited December 29, 2018 by studiot

[icester]

 The orientation o charge velocity is irrelevant because constant linear velocity is not affected by magnetic field regardless of magnitudes of both, field and charge...

If such phenomena existed then we would have inertial navigation device 100 years ago due to simply moving wire in Earth's magnetic field...

Lorentz was the inventor of aether and I suspect that is why he formulated his mathematical model assuming existence of his Luminiferous aether:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

44 minutes ago, Strange said:

Where does it say that a static wire in a static magnetic field will generate a voltage?

But that is not what you have. You have a static wire. No moving charged particles. No moving magnetic field.

You have a uniform, static, unchanging, non-varying magnetic field.

You have a static, non-moving wire in that uniform, static, unchanging, non-varying magnetic field.

Theory says you will get NO voltage. What does your experiment show? NO VOLTAGE.

What is wrong with that?

To my knowledge it is irrelevant what moves and what remains still as long as there is relative motion... It is called simple relativity... Lorentz absolute motion is a failed concept...

[studiot]

12 minutes ago, icester said:

The orientation o charge velocity is irrelevant because constant linear velocity is not affected by magnetic field regardless of magnitudes of both, field and charge.

What does this mean?

[icester]

2 minutes ago, studiot said:

What does this mean?

It means that the Lorentz force on a charge moving with constant linear velocity in constant uniform magnetic field is zero regardless of charge magnitude q, magnetic field magnitude B and velocity magnitude v... Thus F = q * v * B = 0...

[studiot]

13 minutes ago, icester said:

It means that the Lorentz force on a charge moving with constant linear velocity in constant uniform magnetic field is zero regardless of charge magnitude q, magnetic field magnitude B and velocity magnitude v... Thus F = q * v * B = 0...

But that is not what you wrote before, and why do you think it is any more correct?

Edited December 29, 2018 by studiot

[icester]

Just now, studiot said:

But that is not what you wrote before.

Please, be specific and point to where I have said something different...

[studiot]

3 minutes ago, icester said:

Please, be specific and point to where I have said something different...

I was specific, but I have repeated the extract and underlined where your words make no sense.

40 minutes ago, icester said:

The orientation o charge velocity is irrelevant because constant linear velocity is not affected by magnetic field regardless of magnitudes of both, field and charge..

 

You clearly  (but wrongly) stated velocity to be unaffected by the magnetic field. (For example the Hall effect).

Now you are talking about Lorenz forces, not velocity,

[icester]

15 minutes ago, studiot said:

I was specific, but I have repeated the extract and underlined where your words make no sense.

 

You clearly  (but wrongly) stated velocity to be unaffected by the magnetic field. (For example the Hall effect).

Now you are talking about Lorenz forces, not velocity,

I was referring to constant linear velocity and NOT instantaneous velocity which can be a part of accelerated motion... Electrons move with accelerated motion forming electric current which represents average velocity and not constant linear velocity... Thus Hall effect is related to dynamics of electrons... By the way, Lorentz  also claimed the true force equation as his own  but is should be called Laplace force as Laplace was the one who formulated the equation of force regarding constant magnetic field and current caring conductor...  So, Hall effect is due to Laplace force...

Edited December 29, 2018 by icester

[Strange]

1 hour ago, icester said:

To my knowledge it is irrelevant what moves and what remains still as long as there is relative motion... It is called simple relativity...

But there is no relative motion. Static wire. Static magnetic field. Therefore no voltage. 

Why do you think there should be?

[icester]

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

But there is no relative motion. Static wire. Static magnetic field. Therefore no voltage. 

Why do you think there should be?

Magnetic field is rotating relative to stationary wire as stated before I also checked the case where magnet is stationary and wire is rotating just to prove to my self that motion is always relative...

[Strange]

3 minutes ago, icester said:

Magnetic field is rotating

Is it?

 

After all, you (correctly) said:

13 hours ago, icester said:

And there is no changing magnetic field in rotating magnet because it rotates around it's axis of symmetry...

So there is no voltage expected.

[icester]

5 minutes ago, Strange said:

Is it?

 

After all, you (correctly) said:

So there is no voltage expected.

It is the same with long bar magnet magnetized in direction perpendicular to it's length and as long as there is parallel and relative constant linear motion between magnet and wire the Lorentz force and apparent EMF is zero...

Edited December 29, 2018 by icester

[Strange]

11 minutes ago, icester said:

It is the same with long bar magnet magnetized in direction perpendicular to it's length

Do you mean "perpendicular"? So the N and S poles are along the long length of the magnet?

Or do you mean a bar magnet with the N and S poles at each end?

11 minutes ago, icester said:

as long as there is parallel and relative constant linear motion between magnet and wire the Lorentz force and apparent EMF is zero

That is not true. (Maybe you can contrive a case where it is true but, in general, uniform motion of a wire through a magnetic field will generate a voltage.)

But you seem to alternate between saying that there should be no voltage and saying that you expect to measure a voltage.

So what do you expect to see?

[icester]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

Do you mean "perpendicular"? So the N and S poles are along the long length of the magnet?

Or do you mean a bar magnet with the N and S poles at each end?

That is not true. (Maybe you can contrive a case where it is true but, in general, uniform motion of a wire through a magnetic field will generate a voltage.)

But you seem to alternate between saying that there should be no voltage and saying that you expect to measure a voltage.

So what do you expect to see?

No, I state clearly, and long magnet to have a long uniform field for the wire to move trough must have north pole across it's length on wider width side and south on the other wider one...

Just like I said perpendicular to it's length... Your statement "in general, uniform motion of a wire through a magnetic field will generate a voltage." refers to what the universities teach except they provide no experimental evidence at all, now and in the past...

[Strange]

12 minutes ago, icester said:

Just like I said perpendicular to it's length... Your statement "in general, uniform motion of a wire through a magnetic field will generate a voltage." refers to what the universities teach except they provide no experimental evidence at all, now and in the past...

This is nonsense. 

But also, this is not what your "experiment" shows, so it is irrelevant. You do not have a wire moving through a magnetic field (as you admit).

What do you expect from your experiment? And why? Please show the math.

As you keep repeating ridiculous statements like this and refuse to provide sensible answers to questions I will request this thread is closed.

[icester]

Just now, Strange said:

This is nonsense. 

But also, this is not what your "experiment" shows, so it is irrelevant. You do not have a wire moving through a magnetic field (as you admit).

As you keep repeating ridiculous statements like this and refuse to provide sensible answers to questions I will request this thread is closed.

I never said "I do not have wire moving trough magnetic field"... I've said that there is no EMF when wire moves with constant velocity trough constant magnetic field ...

[Strange]

3 minutes ago, icester said:

I never said "I do not have wire moving trough magnetic field"...

Yes you did.

You said:

14 hours ago, icester said:

And there is no changing magnetic field in rotating magnet because it rotates around it's axis of symmetry...

And the wire is not moving.

So, no moving magnetic field and no moving wire.

Therefore you admit that you do not have wire moving trough magnetic field.

4 minutes ago, icester said:

I've said that there is no EMF when wire moves with constant velocity trough constant magnetic field

This is wrong.

And it is irrelevant because you do not have a wire moving through a magnetic field. As you admit.

What do you expect from your experiment? And why? Please show the math.

[icester]

15 minutes ago, Strange said:

Yes you did.

You said:

And the wire is not moving.

So, no moving magnetic field and no moving wire.

Therefore you admit that you do not have wire moving trough magnetic field.

This is wrong.

And it is irrelevant because you do not have a wire moving through a magnetic field. As you admit.

What do you expect from your experiment? And why? Please show the math.

I've said " And there is no changing magnetic field in rotating magnet because it rotates around it's axis of symmetry... "

is correct because changing means that either and or flux intensity changes and or orientation changes  and or acceleration is non zero...

Cutting trough identical flux lines with constant frequency is what constant velocity motion in uniform magnetic field is...

Here is the Orman Force on an electron moving in uniform magnetic field accelerated by uniform electric field in Matlab script format:

 

 

OrmanForce.m

Edited December 29, 2018 by icester

[Strange]

28 minutes ago, icester said:

Cutting trough identical flux lines with constant frequency is what constant velocity motion in uniform magnetic field is...

You are not making any sense.

You are saying that there is no change in the field but at the same time that the stationary wire is moving through the field. This is contradictory.

28 minutes ago, icester said:

Here is the Orman Force

What is "Orman Force"? And what connection does it have with your experiment?

What do you expect from your experiment? And why? (And why do you refuse to answer questions?)

[icester]

Just now, Strange said:

You are not making any sense.

You are saying that there is no change in the field but at the same time that the stationary wire is moving through the field. This is contradictory.

What is "Orman Force"? And what connection does it have with your experiment?

What do you expect from your experiment? And why? (And why do you refuse to answer questions?)

 

OrmanForce.pdf

[Strange]

1 minute ago, icester said:

 

OrmanForce.pdf

Please read the rules of the forum.

That just seems to be the contents of this thread converted to PDF. What is the point?

 

[icester]

What question is that I refuse to answer?

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

Please read the rules of the forum.

That just seems to be the contents of this thread converted to PDF. What is the point?

 

No, that is my scientific paper but at this point I fail to understand what is you intention on this thread...

Please, describe  an experiment where a wire is moving with constant velocity in constant  magnetic field...

[Strange]

38 minutes ago, icester said:

No, that is my scientific paper but at this point I fail to understand what is you intention on this thread...

This is your thread. What is your intention?

You have an experiment that should NOT generate a voltage. And it does NOT generate a voltage. Then you invent a force for which there is no evidence.

So what is the point of this thread?

 

40 minutes ago, icester said:

What question is that I refuse to answer?

This one, for example: What do you expect from your experiment? And why?

 

[icester]

Your questions are answered and just need to read the history more carefully... And since you are not answering my questions I wish not to extend this conversation with you because it is not useful to any party...

[iNow]

6 minutes ago, icester said:

Your questions are answered and just need to read the history more carefully.

Where specifically, amd what does it say there? Will you please repeat it here for convenience?

Edited December 29, 2018 by iNow