Gravitomagnetism?

[Klaynos]

It sounds interesting but if they want to prove that it works they could take a non-magnetic mass on a spring and create enough gravity to stretch it farther than it is just from the Earth's gravity.

 

The problem is how amazingly weak gravity is :'(

[swansont]

Is gravitomagnetism similiar to electrogravitics, and the Tampere Experiment, where spinning superconductors appeared to cause a reduction of mass in nonmagnetic materials?

 

Is this the Podkletnov apparatus? If so, it's not the same thing — that's antigravity bunkum.

[Alpha-137]

Dear Professor Swanson;

 

Quote, “Correlation does not imply causality.”

 

Yes I do understand that, But if you go back and look up the past ice ages

 

You will see that they have a correlation with the movements of the magnetic poles.

 

Where have we found on the Moon and Mars, only at the magnetic poles.

 

 

Professor Swanson, I am sure that in your lab you have a thermal immerging devise, or

 

can get one. And I am also sure that you have some very strong magnets there too.

 

So take magnets and put the in any room at any temperature and I will assure you that the

 

magnets will be one of the coldish points in the room.

 

 

 

Professor Swanson, If you really would like understand what I am saying here, I do have

 

an experiment that will help you do just that.

 

A

__________

a-1 [] ^ []a-2

B ____

C-------

D_____

E[****]

 

 

(A) Is a set of balance scales

(a-1) This half is set over the (B) plate

(a-2)This half is set out over free space

(B) Is an [iron] plate at a temp as [Cold] as you can make it

© Is a high temp insulator

(D) Is a [iron] plate at a temp as [Hot] as you make it

(E) Is glass pan filled with sand or any non-magnetic[ Mass]

 

 

Once this is set up remove © the high temp insulator

(a-1) will lose gravitational pull on it making it rise and

(a-2) to lower and at the same time causing the non-magnetic

mass in (E) to be attracted to plate (D)

 

These actions or effects are only temporary.

 

 

 

Alpha-137:)

[5614]

So take magnets and put the in any room at any temperature and I will assure you that the

That's only because it is metallic and so loses heat easily. Nothing to do with it's magnetic properties. If you want proof then take a metallica heat sink or such and you will observe the same effect you claim will only happen to a magnet.

 

Indeed you don't even need thermal imaging equipment to be able to observe this. My magnets feel cold, but my heatsink feels colder.

[swansont]

Dear Professor Swanson;

 

Quote' date=' “Correlation does not imply causality.”

 

Yes I do understand that, But if you go back and look up the past ice ages

 

You will see that they have a correlation with the movements of the magnetic poles.

[/quote']

 

My title is not professor; there is no need to address me with any title at all. The only people that I make call me "Dr." are the ones who use "Mr." and should know better than that, i.e. they should be calling me by my first name. (or, rarely, as a counterattack to intimidation tactics) swanson or swansont is fine.

 

 

The last reversal was, IIRC, 780,000 years ago. If you have evidence for this correlation, please provide a link. The poles have been wandering quite a bit in the last few years, and we've been recording the highest temperatures in recorded history just recently. So, I'm calling BS on this.

[Alpha-137]

Dear 5614

 

Line up heat sinks of different metals and then up a highgrade magnet

 

And I will assure you that the magnet will be the coldest of them all.

 

Alpha-137:)

[5614]

Does a NIB magnet measuring about 5cm x 4cm x 2cm count???

[swansont]

The magnetocaloric effect (wiki entry)

 

Note that the magnitude is degrees per Tesla, and that if you did such a thing and a material heated or cooled, and you left it in in that condition, the material would return to ambient temperature. The notion that a static magnet will be cooler than the rest of the room defies several, if not all, of the the laws of thermodynamics.

[YT2095]

Dear YT2095' date=' Klaynos, 5614

 

All of you seam to be into science putty good and you YT2095, on your web site you claim to have a lab. So before you see or make a point you really should read the post very carefully.

[/quote']

 

the 1`st part of that makes No Sense! "All of you seam to be into science putty good " WTF?

 

and as for my Lab, yeah?

what the Smeg has That got to do with the price of beans in China? It`s just as relevant!

 

your post WAS read carefully, and I do stand by All that I said, your problem is exactly What?

[Alpha-137]

Dear swansont;

 

I did not know that it was breaking any thermodynamics laws, but I did see

 

this demonstrated in the lab at the U of H here in Houston a few years back.

 

It was with second generation night vision equipment and high grade ceramic

 

magnets.

 

 

Alpha-137

[5614]

I don't know what you saw. But you did not see a magnet sitting still getting colder due to its own magnetic field.

 

As specifically stated in Swansont's links the magnetocaloric effects only occur when a magnetic field is applied or removed, effectively if there is a change in the magnetic field. A stationary magnet has a magnetic field, but it is not changing so no temperature change happens either.

 

Like I've said, a magnet sitting in a room will feel cool to touch, because it is metallic, this is nothing to do with it's magnetic properties.

[swansont]

Dear swansont;

 

I did not know that it was breaking any thermodynamics laws' date=' but I did see

 

this demonstrated in the lab at the U of H here in Houston a few years back.

 

It was with second generation night vision equipment and high grade ceramic

 

magnets.

 

 

Alpha-137 [/quote']

 

The question is: what, exactly, did you see demonstrated? It was most assuredly not a static magnet in thermal equilibrium with its surroundings. Besides the thermodynamic argument, that's a pretty boring demonstration.

 

The way the magnetic refrigeration works is to apply the field, which heats the material up, let it come to thermal equilibrium (i.e. conduct away heat), and then remove the field, which cools it down below the ambient temperature. That is decidedly different from "magnets are colder than everything else"

[Alpha-137]

Dear swansont;

 

I am a retired investigator, and it was a class on using night vision equipment in our work. And in the demonstration the instructor pointed out the high grade ceramic magnets as showing up as one of the coldest objects in the room. He had all kinds of stuff on the table, and around the room. Such as a warm ashtray, a cold coffee cup, along with a warm spot on a stool where someone had just gotten up from, and many other things.

 

Alpha-137:)

[swansont]

Dear swansont;

 

I am a retired investigator' date=' and it was a class on using night vision equipment in our work. And in the demonstration the instructor pointed out the high grade ceramic magnets as showing up as one of the coldest objects in the room. He had all kinds of stuff on the table, and around the room. Such as a warm ashtray, a cold coffee cup, along with a warm spot on a stool where someone had just gotten up from, and many other things.

 

Alpha-137:)[/quote']

 

And I am a practicing physicist, and I'm telling you something else must be involved; there's no physics to account for this being a magnetic effect. Night-vision goggles detect IR, which is not the same as measuring temperature unless you have calibrated the device: the ceramic may not have a particularly high emissivity, meaning it may not act much like a blackbody. As a result, it may emit less in the IR portion where the detector was sensing (probably near 10 microns), and would thus look colder than other objects that had higher emissivities, or were actually hotter. If that were the case, it would have nothing to do with it being a magnet and everything to do with it being a ceramic that wasn't a good blackbody.

[YT2095]

is it possible the Magnet was affecting the aparatus directly?

in much the same way they can shut down thermionic valves or mess up electron beams?

I`m fairly sure that the image presented in IR googles is "Second hand" as in you`re seeing a Phosphor, and not the real object itself.

 

also, How long had the magnet been there in order to "aclimatise"?

and did anyone think to cover this magnet with something like a peice of paper and see if the same still held true?

 

just a few thoughts

[Alpha-137]

Dear swansont & YT2095;

 

I do not know how long the magnet was there nor did any one put a piece of paper on it. But those are good questions.

 

Now the NOT being a good Blackbody is most likely the best guess here. If it can not be from the magnetism.

 

Alpha-137

[SmallIsPower]

[Q1] How can these two extreme states of iron coexist in this area of a

heavenly body?

 

What?

 

[Q2] Why iron as the second layer' date=' and not one the other 27 known

heaver elements?

 

Iron is the most stable element (nuclear bonding energies) so there is alot more of it about.

[/quote']

Not exactly

 

http://www.nineplanets.org/earth.html

Taken as a whole, the Earth's chemical composition (by mass) is:

 

 

34.6% Iron

29.5% Oxygen

15.2% Silicon

12.7% Magnesium

2.4% Nickel

1.9% Sulfur

0.05% Titanium

 

[swansont]

Not exactly

 

 

No' date=' Klaynos was correct. Context is everything. The discussion was about "heaver [sic'] elements," (not sure what the 27 refers to, though). Of heavier elements, iron is the most abundant.

[YT2095]

in elements 27 is Cobalt (right next door to Iron of #26) also a magnetic element. perhaps it was a typo?

I strongly doubt he meant Alu whos atomic Mass is 27 though.

[Alpha-137]

Dear swansont & YT2095

 

The point that I was trying to make is that the Earth is 4 billon + years

 

and very fluid between the solid inner-core and the solid crust wouldn’t think

 

that the area of the outer –core or second layer would made up of the

 

heavier elements other then Iron.

 

Alpha-137

[5614]

The inner core wouldn't think about the outter core? What the heck?

 

Iron is the most common heaviest element because it is the most stable, ie. it has the highest binding energy per nucleon.

[swansont]

And there are reasons why heavier elements are not found in the core. Chemical differentiation while the earth cooled.

[YT2095]

Iron is the most common heaviest element because it is the most stable, ie. it has the highest binding energy per nucleon.

 

is that why Stars usualy stop at Iron and start thowing that out just before they die?

[swansont]

is that why Stars usualy stop at Iron and start thowing that out just before they die?

 

For heavy stars, yes. Smaller/less massive ones don't have the pressures high enough to get the heavier-element fusion going, so they stop at He —> C. Fusing iron or other elements/isotopes around there would be endothermic. You can get those elements in a supernova, though, when there's a bunch of "spare" energy around.

[Alpha-137]

And there are reasons why heavier elements are not found in the core. Chemical differentiation while the earth cooled.

 

Dear swansont & YT2095;

 

The area of the Earth that is in question has not cooled however, and in

 

4 billion +years wouldn’t you think that gravity would have made the heavier

 

elements settle downthrough the fluid magma and molted iron to make up a

 

different outer-core.

 

Alpha-137