Magnetic Wind Harnessing

[Christophe]

Hello friends,

I would like to introduce a concept that has been brought to my attention through my understanding of Magnetic Fields at the conceptual level.

Firstly to introduce myself, I am a Computer Science student with passions in just about all subjects including but not limited to Astronomy and Physics. My experience in application is limited but my understanding of concepts is stable.

 

Intro
As we know Solar Winds particularly effect our atmosphere through spikes that affect electronic equipment through these surges of disturbance in the magnetic field of our home, Earth.

This effect poses an interesting interaction between the Magnetic Fields on our planet and the electronic equipment that we use today.

 

Definition:
In such similarity of Magnetic fields (minus the magnitude comparison between the Suns Magnetic Field and the Earths natural Magnetic Field) I have dubbed the word "Magnetic Wind" in accordance with its flowing characteristics and invisible interaction by physical observation, just as wind itself.

[Note: The comparison in mention of "Magentic Fields" and "Wind" is purely abstract and in no way combines conceptual manifestations of each individual definition as related to the other. This was simply an observation made to signify the definition of Magentic Wind as respect to the Earth, as Solar Wind relates to the Sun.]

In current observation of Earths Magnetic Field (dubbed Magnetic Wind), research facilities have observed the flow and it presents itself like so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0211/field_glatz_big.gif (attached is the image of this link)

It is quite chaotic, as far as my conceptual understanding this sort of distorted field produces movement of tectonic plates in non-synchronized directions cause collisions and of course leading to Earthquakes and fault lines.

In similar aspects our weather patterns are affected by the Magnetic Fields guidance of our atmospheric pressure.

Concept:

Using our definitions and understandings above, i would like to introduce a concept that may have already been understood by previous minds in history.

If it is possible to stabilize and Harmonize the Magnetic Wind (i assume it would be a one directional motion around the earth)
The second image attached is my interpretation of what this might conceptually look like.

If this was the case, a consistent directional magnetic field could power induction based devices simply through its natural source. One could develop devices (such as Tesla's devices) to be powered by the natural flow of the Magnetic Wind.

In other interpretation this could stabilize our atmosphere and reduce extremities in weather patterns.

Outreach:

My interest is hearing from my peers in similar or higher understanding of these concepts.
Please leave any observation, inconsistencies, and other ideas below.
Thank you for your feedback!

 

Namaste.

More than anything I would like to be proven wrong so that I may sleep again at night.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Christophe

[studiot]

If you would like to discuss physics then let us discuss physics.

 

If you would like to discuss far eastern religious philosophy, then surely the physics forum here is not the place.

 

Please do not mix the two, they do not mix well.

 

I suugest you look up the difference between a magnetic field, which is not moving, and a 'wind' which is and start your rethink from there.

Edited April 25, 2014 by studiot

[Christophe]

If you would like to discuss physics then let us discuss physics.

 

If you would like to discuss far eastern religious philosophy, then surely the physics forum here is not the place.

 

Please do not mix the two, they do not mix well.

 

I suugest you look up the difference between a magnetic field, which is not moving, and a 'wind' which is and start your rethink from there.

Thank you for your insight and i shall dwell deeper on these subjects.

 

My mentions of the relation between "Magnetic Fields" and "wind" is purely abstract and symbolizes no direct correlation in their conceptual manifestations.

 

 

As far as your religious reference:

Namaste:

1. Indian gesture of greeting: a polite bow of greeting or farewell used by Hindus, made with the hands held at chest height and both palms pressed together

One cannot use a polite gesture by its bare definition? I am sorry that this has caused confusion in subject of the matter.

 

The concept is already present as we use wireless charging devices in a similar manner but on a lower scale, I may have worded my concept incorrectly but one cannot disagree that it has not already been developed through wireless charging devices in current day and age.

 

I will refrain from using anything "religious" based vocabulary on the intent of politeness to refrain future confusion as I have no relation to eastern religion other than this one word.

I do apologize for using such a stigmatic word in which has confused the subject matter, this concept is purely related to Physics.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Christophe

[studiot]

I have no objection to the namaste greeting.

 

That is really good. I wish everyone was that polite.

 

But your text is permeated with confusions about physics, and these are related to phenomena such as terrestrial plate techtonics, atmospheric effects and so forth.

 

A magnetic field is generated by magnet.

This filed only moves if the magent does.

 

Solar winds are streams of charged particles emitted by the Sun. they do move and in doing so interact with the magnetic fields of the bodies of the solar system, according to Lorenz law.

 

Does this help?

[Christophe]

It most certainly does direct me in the right direction!

I do completely accept feedback in all forms as I personally am aware of my limitation and my aspiration in growth, I never claim to know more than what I can grasp and I am continuously looking to grasp more with personal development.

 

 

In further research I would like to clarify what my hypothesis hopes to acknowledge

In reference to the two methods a Magnetic Field Manifests in our reality:
Electron with displacement over a distance
Natural Existing Magnetic Fields (Earth)
http://www.trifield.com/content/about-electromagnetism/

We know that the movement of an electron through time-space can create an electric field of attraction or repulsion, as well as a radial magnetic field (if displacement is through a wire with an existing current)
ie, the displacement of the Electric fields produced by electrons stimulate a magnetic field

The main question:
Could not the Magnetic field of the earth serve as the potential for electrons to be stimulated to create a current?
If yes or no please explain with ideas to references if possible.

I really do appreciate this!

 

 

 

 

[Add]
Just as the "primary winding" in current wireless charging devices create a magnetic field for the "secondary winding" in the target charging device, could not the Earth already be creating this Primary winding?

Edited April 25, 2014 by Christophe

[studiot]

 

Just as the "primary winding" in current wireless charging devices create a magnetic field for the "secondary winding" in the target charging device, could not the Earth already be creating this Primary winding?

 

 

 

Do you mean a transformer?

 

Let us use this device as an example of how not to guess at the physics.

 

By the way looking back, sorry about my poor spelling in the last post.

[Christophe]

Just as a transformer, we purposely insulate transformers in their casing to prevent external interference with the internal system.
This, to me, says that there is a particular affect from the natural Magnetic Current of the Earth or any other electronics in the vicinity.

In conclusion, could we use a transformer ( or possibly a specialized version of a transformer catered to a more macro based interaction with an already existing magnetic field?
Good call on the transformer direction, I couldn't quite put it in existing comparisons.

Once again I pose the question:
Could not the Magnetic Field of Earth be capable of creating currents in "Transformer" like devices that would stimulate a current of electrons and thus function as a giant "charging pad"?
Again, if the answer is yes or no please do follow up with any direct references for further study.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Christophe

[studiot]

By itself a magnetic field cannot "stimulate a current of electrons".

That requires a source of energy, other than the magnetic field.

 

The source of energy either supplies mechanical energy to move the magnet and its field through space,

 

or

 

It supplies electrical energy to cause the magnetic field to change in strength.

 

The magnetic field itself is not a source of energy, just an relay transmitting energy from the source to the load.

And the field can only perform this task if it is changing either by motion or by changing in strength.

[Christophe]

I do hope I am not causing any frustration with my questions, but I feel that questions are what pose the existence of ideas, and thus far in civilization many questions have concluded fantastic feats in science.

As to the subject:

I understand your explanation;

I picture the experiment where a stationary coil of a certain radius, and a magnet being displaced inside the coil itself creating such stimulation of the electrons that already exist inside the coil to a moving current in respect to the direction of the magnet being displaced inside the coil.

What about the idea that we (from the perspective of space) are already in motion? in a continuous revolution around a predictable path?
This motion does not fulfill the first criteria where a source energy is supplied mechanically to move the magnet through space?

We can imagine that the earth with its wobbly axis already moves through space.

what about its direct location of the poles? The north and south pole, already may Abstractly resemble a large magnet moving through space?
In this perspective wouldn't mechanical energy be already supplied on earth ("magnet") in such able to initiate automated source energy?

I have no practical answers for such because I have only recently "imagined" if you will, this concept from my limited understanding of magnetic fields and the already existing one sourced by our planet.

My ambitions seek either a complete connection to this hypothesis, or a direct rebuttal in order to be satisfied.
If this hypothesis has any chance of being correct, this may mean an alternative source of energy from an existing source that we may have overlooked over the years of electronic development. I have read many works on tesla including his personal biography of his ambitions and he seemed to understand something about this connection between the planets Magnetic Field and its potential to power "wirelessly" devices across the world at any dynamically appeasing voltage.

Many concluded that the tower that he has built would be the source of the power itself, traveling thousands of miles across the globe to provide such energy, I have observed that his words directly involve a part of the Earth as his source of energy, in what I am visioning the conversion (Transformer based device) between the existing potentials of the earths rotation through space as a form of harness-able power.

If I am causing any issues with my observations please let me know and I shall try to take this elsewhere. The last thing I want to cause is any problems.

[studiot]

 

If I am causing any issues with my observations please let me know and I shall try to take this elsewhere. The last thing I want to cause is any problems.

 

 

No problem whatsoever, airing legitimate scientific thoughs and questions like yours is the purpose of this forum.

 

This motion does not fulfill the first criteria where a source energy is supplied mechanically to move the magnet through space?

 

 

 

 

Yes indeed the Earth carries its magnetic field through space around the Sun with it as it goes.

 

It also rotates that field as it spins on its axis.

 

In order for this moving field to create a current it must interact with a conductor, that is not moving with the Earth.

In other words any conductor mounted on the Earth has the same motion as the Earth and so experiences no change in the terrestrial field due to the Earth's motion.

So your pickup conductor would have to hang in space above the Earth.

How would you get it up there?

How would you keep it up there?

How would you connect to it?

 

Bear in mind that it could not 'hover' over one spot.

 

Charged particles in space around the Earth are not mounted on the Earth and do not posses its motion. These are affected by the motion of the Earth's magnetic field as I indicated earlier. These are the 'winds' .

 

Google has some very pretty pictures of the Van Allen Belts.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&source=hp&q=van+allen+radiation+zones&gbv=2&oq=Van+Allen&gs_l=heirloom-hp.1.6.0l5j0i10j0l2j0i10j0.1406.6125.0.10859.10.10.0.0.0.0.125.1016.6j4.10.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.10.1016.iVBfU6UEgzo

[Christophe]

I genuinely appreciate your time and patience studiot! It has definitely helped in my understanding and a great set of new tools as I review more of Tesla's work.
Reading your questions in reference to my questions actually brought a smile to my face! The true meaning of scholarly exchange of ideas!

What do you think about Earth as the conductor? I have seen references of its mention, and as far as most observations we know that it is a at a neutral charge (thus being able to absorb excess electrons as a "grounding" system)

What happens to the electrons as they disperse into the ground? Sure they do spread apart and distribute themselves evenly, but at some critical point electrons must escape this magnificent conductor in order to remain in equilibrium?

In perspective of the magnetic field and its existence outside of the earth itself; the earth is spherical, and its physical motion makes a very small displacement as say if a cube was spinning in space, its corners would create a displacement. However a sphere may spin in any direction and still maintain no displacement in reference to its location in time and space.

The moving factors again are the magnetic field from both the rotation around the sun moving in a radial motion, and the spin of the axis also moving in a radial motion, this is the observation of movement at an indefinitely small displacement from the surface of the earth. But the shape of the earth itself (if you picture a sphere spinning in a 2D plane) completely void of motion (other than the mass itself moving).

 

Of course using the Earth as a natural conductor would pose a few ideas:
The layers of the earth themselves and the materials and their individual conductivity
The direct "Center" of the earth, we know that it is surrounded by a less dense "liquid" as opposed to the mass of the center, does the massive center also spin or remain stationary?

Edited April 25, 2014 by Christophe

[studiot]

 

What do you think about Earth as the conductor? I have seen references of its mention, and as far as most observations we know that it is a at a neutral charge (thus being able to absorb excess electrons as a "grounding" system)

 

 

 

Congratulations on realising that aspect of an electrical grounding system. Most people misunderstand the action of grounding.

 

No the Earth is not a very good conductor in that it has medium to high resistivity, and with some rocks eg granite very high resistivity.

But it also has a very large cross sectional area so when we divide one large number (the resistivity) by another (the cross section) the apparent resistance is much smaller.

 

But the real reason that the earth works as a ground is its abilty to maintain its potential, regardless of the charge flow into or out of it (for any practical charge flow we can create).

 

 

Of course using the Earth as a natural conductor would pose a few ideas:

The layers of the earth themselves and the materials and their individual conductivity

The direct "Center" of the earth, we know that it is surrounded by a less dense "liquid" as opposed to the mass of the center, does the massive center also spin or remain stationary?

 

 

 

I do not know if core spins at a sufficiently different rate to have a significant effect. But the strength of the field is sensibly constant over short times, at any point on the surface. It is the rate change of the field which induces the current, either by relative motion between the conductor and the magnet or by rapid change of the field.

 

I am not sure if you quite picked up on my point about conductors attached to the Earth.

 

Anything attached to or part of the Earth is not moving relative to the Earth's field, so no current is induced as a result.

 

In the Early to middle part of the last century a physicist called Alven won a Nobel prize for his work on electric effects in gas plasmas.

 

He also developed an electromagnetic theory about the electric effects in clusters of stars (which contain a lot of plasma) and the induced currents caused by spinning galaxies.

 

The aspect of this theory is it uses simple conventional theory to explain many astonomical phenomena without a 'big bang' but it did not catch on, although it has not been disproved.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hannes+alven&hl=en-GB&gbv=2&oq=hannes+alven&gs_l=heirloom-serp.3..0i10l6j0i5i10i30.9047.10109.0.10812.7.7.0.0.0.1.110.734.2j5.7.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-serp..1.6.609.PBpWrwbmRCQ

[Christophe]

 

But it also has a very large cross sectional area so when we divide one large number (the resistivity) by another (the cross section) the apparent resistance is much smaller.

 

Essentially due to the perspective of the size of Earth I would argue that it is a pretty decent conductor, sure the resistivity of each individual material type within its grounds would provide such.

The ratio of mass and potential through space seems to overcome its limitation on being "too resistive" to carry a flow within its matter.

 

 

 

Congratulations on realising that aspect of an electrical grounding system. Most people misunderstand the action of grounding.

Conservation of mass played a big role in my understanding of this

Thank you Lavoisier!

 

 

 

It is the rate change of the field which induces the current, either by relative motion between the conductor and the magnet or by rapid change of the field.

well we have a combination of both correct?

The magnetic field in respect to earths motion (in rotation, not in movement around the sun).

As well as the changes in the Magnetic Field over time, sure its not a lot in our minuscule perspectives as people on earth, however in relation to the size and proportional relation it may simply be an overlooked aspect. (This would require some hefty mathematical breakdowns which.

 

In complete understanding of the internals of the earth is only so limited by our technology to "See" through the earth with sonar scans and measuring of density by the length/angle of a waves return etc.

 

Speculation must complete our observation of the internals of the Earth as we have no direct way of "dissecting" and observing for sure.

 

 

 

 

I am not sure if you quite picked up on my point about conductors attached to the Earth.

I most certainly did, however i have observed that something attached to an object doesn't necessarily act AS the object, especially through experiments in observation of electrical charge distributed along a metallic sphere, I was simply stating the earth (or even below certain points of depth within the earth) have potentials that we don't completely justify yet since our observation of the inside is completed speculation as mentioned under the quote above this one. (this in itself is speculation of course)

 

In the case of physical displacement in space, it change character as we dive deeper into the higher density and higher gravitation force towards the center (speculation once more, i mentioned a sphere spinning on a 2D plane)

 

 

Anything attached to or part of the Earth is not moving relative to the Earth's field, so no current is induced as a result.

To speculate on the "part of Earth" What about inside? Again i feel that layers of shifting mass underneath the earth are indeed moving in respect to the Magnetic Field already as it is, hence the natural occurrence of natural dissasters. Seems there is a missing piece here.

 

In part we know that the magnetic field already does conduct much of the internal movement and atmospheric movement of earth (correct?), So why couldn't we observe the Earth as already being a conductor in relation to such observation? If nothing was being stimulated (electrons within a tectonic plate) to force a movement in relation to the magnetic field within a 3D "cutout" of the inside of the earth, then we would not have mass moving underneath us and less dense mass moving above us. (one of the leading ideas behind the "Ether" movement back in the day).

 

 

 

 

The aspect of this theory is it uses simple conventional theory to explain many astonomical phenomena without a 'big bang' but it did not catch on, although it has not been disproved.

 

I have taken a look in and will add his ideas to the research as they seem directly relevant to the possible mechanics terrestrial conductivity, his observation of Aurorae seems also intriguing.

 

Personally i believe we understand many concepts about the earth in separate relating factors (tectonic plates, weather patterns, aurorae), but i believe they all share a common source of manifestation and thus could be legitimately manipulated.

 

I remember reading Tesla mention something about the conductivity within the earth is much different than what we use above its ground, there may be certain frequencies or certain observations that he has made in realizing a way to transfer such wireless power without the effects of such hefty resistivity (maybe a slight stimulation in the earth atmosphere to loosen the electrons? who knows). Sadly his tower was destroyed and his documents ceased by FBI official <enter conspiracy theory here>.

 

My main question is always "why" but sometimes that question goes unanswered. Which is ok with me, I can let go of such troubling actions.

The intriguing part is that they DID take down the tower and they DID confiscate his documents, those are intentions in my opinion.

Intention such as these give off a peculiar direction towards his work and his understanding, like there is something we are overlooking.

 

I have quite the arsenal of information from our conversation here, I will look further into many pieces and if i find something of interest I shall leave the trail here!

 

Once again, I am much appreciative of our process through these subjects! Namaste

[studiot]

You have some good ideas and keen perceptions.

 

Unfortunately you have jumbled some of these up where they do not run together.

 

I am trying to help you separate them, as it will help see things more clearly.

 

Alven's work has nothing to do with terrestrial conductivity.

Terrestrial conductivity is not a simple subject, because of the size of earth relative to any electrical connection.

Strangely Coulomb was the first to investigate the mathematics of this, although he did not do so in relation to electricity.

The shape of the conductivity isobars is the same as Coulombs solution to the bulb of pressure (ie the pressure distribution) under foundations, which he did study.

The conductivity plots are 3 dimensional, by the way.

 

It is just plain wrong to think that any significant current flows through insulating rocks such as granite. The resistance of such rocks is enormous in any direction.

 

I did not say that anything attached to the Earth is the same as the Earth I said it has the same motion.

So any phenomenon due to that motion will be common to both.

 

Both are affected by the magnetic field of the Sun (which is much weaker than the Earth's at the Earth's orbit) as both are in motion through it.

It was this effect Alven was describing.

[michel123456]

 

No problem whatsoever, airing legitimate scientific thoughs and questions like yours is the purpose of this forum.

 

 

Yes indeed the Earth carries its magnetic field through space around the Sun with it as it goes.

 

It also rotates that field as it spins on its axis.

 

In order for this moving field to create a current it must interact with a conductor, that is not moving with the Earth.

In other words any conductor mounted on the Earth has the same motion as the Earth and so experiences no change in the terrestrial field due to the Earth's motion.

So your pickup conductor would have to hang in space above the Earth.

How would you get it up there?

How would you keep it up there?

How would you connect to it?

 

Bear in mind that it could not 'hover' over one spot.

 

Charged particles in space around the Earth are not mounted on the Earth and do not posses its motion. These are affected by the motion of the Earth's magnetic field as I indicated earlier. These are the 'winds' .

 

Google has some very pretty pictures of the Van Allen Belts.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&source=hp&q=van+allen+radiation+zones&gbv=2&oq=Van+Allen&gs_l=heirloom-hp.1.6.0l5j0i10j0l2j0i10j0.1406.6125.0.10859.10.10.0.0.0.0.125.1016.6j4.10.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.10.1016.iVBfU6UEgzo

The Moon?

"Earth's magnetotail extends well beyond the orbit of the Moon and, once a month, the Moon orbits through it," says Tim Stubbs, a University of Maryland scientist working at the Goddard Space Flight Center. "This can have consequences ranging from lunar 'dust storms' to electrostatic discharges."

 

From here

 

During the crossing, the Moon comes in contact with a gigantic "plasma sheet" of hot charged particles trapped in the tail. The lightest and most mobile of these particles, electrons, pepper the Moon's surface and give the Moon a negative charge.

On the Moon's dayside this effect is counteracted to a degree by sunlight: UV photons knock electrons back off the surface, keeping the build-up of charge at relatively low levels. But on the nightside, in the cold lunar dark, electrons accumulate and voltages can climb to hundreds or thousands of volts.

 

[studiot]

 

The Moon?

 

Fair, if very brief, comment.

[Christophe]

Interesting, haven't seen any mention of that yet.

[Acme]

...

 

 

 

...The direct "Center" of the earth, we know that it is surrounded by a less dense "liquid" as opposed to the mass of the center, does the massive center also spin or remain stationary? ...

I do not know if core spins at a sufficiently different rate to have a significant effect. But the strength of the field is sensibly constant over short times, at any point on the surface. It is the rate change of the field which induces the current, either by relative motion between the conductor and the magnet or by rapid change of the field.

...

 

I read something on this differential spin a couple years back. I don't thinkthis is the original article but perhaps it will shed some light on the idea.

source: >> http://www.livescience.com/30167-earth-core-spins-slowly-magnetic-field.html

 

Earth's Hot Core Spins More Slowly Than Believed

The super-hot inner core of the Earth, once thought to be furiously awhirl with motion, might in fact spin much slower than previously suspected (though still faster than the rest of the planet), new research suggests.

...

Past research analyzing seismic waves traveling through the planet suggested that the inner core might spin faster than the rest of the planet, gaining one degree of extra rotation a year. Now scientists find that although such "super-rotation" likely exists, it appears extraordinarily slower than previously thought one degree of extra rotation every million years.

...

The past estimates that suggested a super-fast inner core can be attributed to short bursts of wobbling of the inner core that clouded up calculations on its spin rate. "The different rates of motion are not incompatible," said researcher Lauren Waszek, a geophysicist at the University of Cambridge in England.

 

These findings "imply that we should also be able to observe other similarly slow inner core motions," Waszek said. Such research could "lead to a better understanding of the evolution of the Earth's magnetic field," she added.

[Christophe]

During one of Teslas moments in perfecting AC current he mentions in enlightenment to his discovery.

 

"The magnet should rotate, just as the earth rotates around the sun"

 

The movement and displacement of a magnet to create a magnetic field, in a similar ordinance to the natural displacement of the earth. The moon seems like an interesting subject all of a sudden...

[michel123456]

During one of Teslas moments in perfecting AC current he mentions in enlightenment to his discovery.

 

"The magnet should rotate, just as the earth rotates around the sun"

 

The movement and displacement of a magnet to create a magnetic field, in a similar ordinance to the natural displacement of the earth. The moon seems like an interesting subject all of a sudden...

The Moon is fascinating.

I have the Mount Everest floating above my head. It blows my mind.

[Christophe]

Comparing further research in finding what would be earths magnetic field in equilibrium I compared the following attached images.

 

A magnet compared to a sphere compared to the earth, at first I thought the lines would take a path revolving around the earth but maybe it would simple flow through the earth itself from S to N, could there be another effect around these main paths that could revolve around the earth? I'm thinking like a double magnetic field? One S to N and then another revolving radially around them.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Christophe