RE: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Mark Iverson]

Yet another example of how the ego totally screws up the (scientific) process...
Imagine where civilization could be now if ego's weren't involved...

-Mark

  _  

From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net] 
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 7:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity


On May 11, 1997, at 2:34 AM, Robert Stirniman wrote:

Magnetic Charge.
Don't leave home without it.
==

References:

F. Ehrenhaft, Phys Z, Vol 31 Page 478, 1930

F. Ehrenhaft, "The Magnetic Current", Science Vol 94 
pp 232-233. September 1941

F. Ehrenhaft, "New Experiments about the Magnetic Current", 
Physical Review, Vol 65 pp 62-63, 1944 

K. Joseph, "Magnetic Currents - The Monopole?", Electric
Spacecraft Journal, Issue #3 pp 18-23, January 1992.

V.F. Mikhailov, "Six Experiments with Magnetic Charge",
Advanced Electromagnetism, Editors: Terrence W. Barrett,
and Dale M. Grimes, World Scientific Publishing. 1995.


Best regards,


Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2440 - Release Date: 10/16/09 
06:32:00

Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Horace Heffner]

On May 11, 1997, at 2:34 AM, Robert Stirniman wrote:

Magnetic Charge.
Don't leave home without it.
==

References:

F. Ehrenhaft, Phys Z, Vol 31 Page 478, 1930

F. Ehrenhaft, "The Magnetic Current", Science Vol 94
pp 232-233. September 1941

F. Ehrenhaft, "New Experiments about the Magnetic Current",
Physical Review, Vol 65 pp 62-63, 1944

K. Joseph, "Magnetic Currents - The Monopole?", Electric
Spacecraft Journal, Issue #3 pp 18-23, January 1992.

V.F. Mikhailov, "Six Experiments with Magnetic Charge",
Advanced Electromagnetism, Editors: Terrence W. Barrett,
and Dale M. Grimes, World Scientific Publishing. 1995.



Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 16, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Esa Ruoho wrote:


not in the slightest.
http://rexresearch.com/leedskal/leedskal.htm
http://www.rexresearch.com/ehrenhaf/ehrenhaf.htm
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,796661,00.html

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Roarty, Francis X  
 wrote:
You mean Leedskalnins’s calcium –earth metal- based megalith  
blocks :_)


Fran



BTW, there was some discussion here at one time regarding Ehrenhaft  
and Mikhailov and his monopole experiments.  For example:


On May 10, 1997, at 6:28 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:


At 6:48 PM 5/10/97, Robert Stirniman wrote:

Horace Heffner wrote:
Sorry, you can't do that without a monopole handy.  The sum of  
flux out of
any closed surface is exactly equal to the sum of of the flux  
into that
closed surface, the net flux is zero.  Another way to say this is  
B dot dS

= 0.  This is equivalent in all respects to saying that each line of
magnetic flux is a closed loop at all times.


Horace. You've seen an article about the recent experiments
by Mikhailov, repeating the experiments of Ehrenhaft.
Magnetic charge is no a fantasy.
Unfortunately, neither are the Maxwellian thought police.
A weber a coulomb. What else do we need?

Regards,
Robert Stirniman


Maybe we need an ehrenhaft?  Uh oh! I better hide. I thought the  
Maxwellian

Thought Police were imaginary!

I think B dot dS = 0 is totally equivalent to the statement there  
is no

monopole.  Ignoring the question of whether this Maxwell's equation is
indeed a law -- if it is a law, it is equivalent to the statement that
there are no free monopoles.

All this is a consequence of the postulates (assumptions) of Maxwell's
laws, which of course would need to be revised in the face of the  
discovery
of a monopole. The existence or not of such a particle is a fact of  
nature

while the rest are assumptions.

It is interresting that monompoles could only exist in pairs and be
consistent with B dot dS = 0 if they at all times occupied exacly  
the *same

point* in space.  Otherwise, you could always have a way to place the
envelope S around one and exclude the other.  However, this being  
the case

that they are always co-centered, they would therefore then always
represent a scalar field, unless acted upon by a charged particle  
or EM

field in the viciniy.

In regard to the above issues, Robert Stirniman brought to my  
attention

some time ago "Advanced Electromagnetism Foundations, Theories and
Applications", edited by Terrence W. Barrett and Dale M. Grimes, World
Scientific Publishing, 1995. Of particular interest is the article  
"Six

experiments with Magnetic Charge", V.F. Mikhailov, p. 593 ff., which
discusses a modern look at the work of Felix Eherenhaft (1879-1952).

Eherenhaft performed the magnetic equivalence of a Millikan's oil drop
experiment in the hopes of isolating magnetic monopoles and measuring
magnetic charge.  Surprisingly, Eherenhaft had positive results,  
obtaining
a value for magnetic charge in the range of 10^-9 to 10^-14  
Gauss*cm^2.

Because this did not agree with Dirac's theorized value of 3.29x10^-8
gauss*cm^2, interest waned in Ehrenhafts work.

Mikhailov created 10^-5 to 10^-6 cm dia. ferromagnetic aerosols by
electrospark sputtering.  This was accomplished by use of current
interrupter iron contacts in argon at one atmosphere.  Helmholtz coils
provided a uniform magnetic field.  The falling aerosol was placed  
in an
intense light beam and viewed with a microscope. The initial  
experiment
showed a roughly equal number of both N and S monopoles.  Switching  
the
field of the Helmholz coils reversed the lateral motion of the  
magnetically
charged particles.  It was noted that increasing *either* magnetic  
field

intensity or light intensity increased the lateral rate of travel.

Many of the particles were electrically and magnetically charged,  
permiting

a comparison of the electrostatic quantum to the magnetic quantum of
charge. Mikhailov found agreement with Eherenhaft that the quantum of
magnetic charge is g = (a)(e)/6 = (1/3)(a^2)(gD) = 5.84x10^-13  
gauss*cm^2,

where Gd is the charge of Dirac's theoretical monopole, a is the fine
structure constant a = (1/137).

The monopoles of Eherenhaft and Mikhailov are not monopole  
particles in the

conventional sense, however. Mikhailov states: "Magnetic charges
(monopoles) are experimentally observed only in the presence of two
components: light and ferromagnetic particles. It seems therefore,  
that
magnetic charges are created a a consequence of of an interaction  
between
photons ans ferromagnetic particles, and moreover, such charges  
cannnot
exists without these physical conditions: without light a particle  
loses

magnetic charge almost instantaneously."


Some observations and experiment suggestions in regard to Mikhailov's
experiments:

1. Lateral motion observed in a uniform magnetic field, regadless  
of light
direction, appears to be a clear violation of Maxwell's laws,  
regardles

Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Esa Ruoho]

not in the slightest.
http://rexresearch.com/leedskal/leedskal.htm
http://www.rexresearch.com/ehrenhaf/ehrenhaf.htm
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,796661,00.html

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Roarty, Francis X <
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote:

>  You mean Leedskalnins’s calcium –earth metal- based megalith blocks :_)
>
> Fran
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* Esa Ruoho [mailto:esaru...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, October 16, 2009 4:22 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity
>
>
>
> when are we going to see  someone take  this new found science of
> magnetricity  or magnetic monopoles, and  mash it up with leedskalnin's
> "magnetic current"  :( :( :(
>
>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Horace Heffner 
> wrote:
>
> "A magnetic charge can behave and interact just like an electric charge in
> some materials,...":
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091015085916.htm
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ygx59kl
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Roarty, Francis X]

You mean Leedskalnins's calcium -earth metal- based megalith blocks :_)
Fran


From: Esa Ruoho [mailto:esaru...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 4:22 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

when are we going to see  someone take  this new found science of magnetricity  
or magnetic monopoles, and  mash it up with leedskalnin's "magnetic current" 
 :( :( :(

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Horace Heffner 
mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net>> wrote:
"A magnetic charge can behave and interact just like an electric charge in some 
materials,...":

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091015085916.htm

http://tinyurl.com/ygx59kl

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/>

Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Terry Blanton]

Using dysprosium or holmiun, rare earth elements of which China has a
virtual monopoly. . . . I wonder how much this recent spin ice
research has influenced the policy of hoarding?

Magnetic monopoles and Dirac strings.  Geeze, what's next?  Free energy?

Terry

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
> "A magnetic charge can behave and interact just like an electric charge in
> some materials,...":
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091015085916.htm
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ygx59kl
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Magnetricity

[Esa Ruoho]

when are we going to see  someone take  this new found science of
magnetricity  or magnetic monopoles, and  mash it up with leedskalnin's
"magnetic current"  :( :( :(


On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:

> "A magnetic charge can behave and interact just like an electric charge in
> some materials,...":
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091015085916.htm
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ygx59kl
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
>
>
>
>
>