[Vo]:

[John Berry]

-Resent (from different email address) because other one had problems.-

As there haven't been any replies to my previous post (Bifilar coil
attracting a charge and Faraday motor no lenz), I'm left wondering why,
was it not understood? Was an obvious fault seen that didn't seem worthy
of reply?
Was it understood and no fault was found leaving people scratching their
head or was it simply not read? (Or am I impatient?)

Does anyone disagree that if you travel parallel to a wire carrying a DC
current and your direction of movement is against the electron drift,
the EMF felt by charges (i.e your body) moving through that magnetic
field (mutually perpendicular to your motion and the B field, hence a
radial 'motional e-field' ala Hooper and is the same that induces a DC
voltage in a Faraday Generator) should not increase no matter what speed
you move along the wire because just as the EMF from the electrons does
increase, all but a constant portion is canceled by the EMF from the
unbalanced moving (in your reference frame) protons.

If I may ask for an analysis of what should happen if the above
experiment were done.
As far as I can see however because the magnetic field is produced by
the protons and electrons (if this were not so rotating an electromagnet
on it's axis would greatly increase it's magnetic field) then the EMF
induced will always be the difference between the electrons and protons
which is always be the same regardless of the speed at which you move
parallel to the current. (unless you move with the electrons in which
case the EMF would decrease to zero at 50% of the electron drift
velocity as you would then have electrons and protons moving in opposite
directions, increasing till at the electron drift velocity you would see
the same strength EMF as standing still except the EMF polarity is reversed)

If this is the case then I'm pretty sure that the coil arrangement I
mentioned in the last post would work and either way it would mean a
Faraday motor with no lenz force would be possible.


(Gur bayl jnl V pna frr guvf abg jbexvat vf vs zbivat cnfg n punetr
qbrfa'g perngr n zntargvp svryq, ohg vg vf xabja gung ebgngvat n punetrq
qvfx qbrf perngr n zntargvp svryq, guvf jbhyq erdhver na nrgure, n
punetrf zbgvba guebhtu juvpu jbhyq unir vg cebqhpr n zntargvp svryq ohg
abg frr n punetr fgngvbanel gb gur nrgure nf cebqhpvat n zntargvp svryq)



> I had some further ideas as writing this, the best stuff is found after:
> ***Faraday!!***
>
> Due to the 'motional e-field' or pancaking of the electric field of the
> electron drift in a wire a positive charge or charged object should be
> attracted and a negatively charged one repelled, the moving electrons
> also should see the stationary charges as moving for them their
> reference frame
>
> <==> coil
> <==> charged disk
>
> This would work even if the coil is canceling bifilar.
> But the magnitude of attraction would be rather small of course as it is
> the worst of both worlds as the number of unbalanced charges on the disk
> are far fewer than the number of conducting electrons in a wire and the
> drift velocity is very slow, so it would be of the same strength as if
> the disk was rotated at electron drift velocity which would be a very
> sad B field.
>
> But one question that comes to mind, would a charged disk feel a self
> inductance resistance to and acceleration or deceleration as a coil
> producing a similar field would find? If the answer is yes and assuming
> the answer would be yes for any charged object accelerating (could this
> be how Woodward works? could it be that the magnetic field from a
> charged cap accelerating creates self inductance? It would act as it it
> has gained inertial mass when charged) then why wouldn't all matter feel
> this self induced resistance to acceleration/deceleration (sure from a
> distance charge balanced matter is neutral but on a microscopic atomic
> scale the moving charges would create an abundance of tiny magnetic
> fields), besides inertia (it would be cool if this was the cause of
> inertial mass of course but that would give electrons and protons the
> same inertial mass and neutrons would have none) no such force is
> measured so does this mean that self inductance doesn't occur in these
> situations? Does an electron accelerated in a particle accelerator feel
> any self inductance or normal inertia only?
>
> If it is possible to establish a magnetic field without penalty however
> then it is possible to spin up a charged disk and because there was no
> energy invested in producing the magnetic field any energy tapped by say
> a coil (said coil being open circuit as it was spun up) as the disk is
> stopped would seemingly be free??????
>
> I don't even want to get into the pinch effect.
>
> ***Faraday!!***
>
> As for the Faraday motor, consider what would happen if you started
> running along a long wire against the electron drift, if you weren't
> moving, the moving electrons would be passing you at 1 m/s (I just
> searched and found Beaty arguing that indeed the speed is something
> around that fast) and the protons would of course be stationary, so if
> you start to run against the drift at say 1m/s then the electrons
> composing the current are now passing you at 2 m/s and the protons at 1
> m/s, still a difference of 1 m/s and no matter how fast you move that's
> all it will be, just as much as if you weren't moving at all.
> So at this point you can look at it as flux cutting, in which case
> moving against the drift faster and faster doesn't produce a higher EMF
> because you are also cutting the flux produced by the protons as well,
> or you can look at it as pancaking fields of electrons and protons but
> either way you aren't going to get a higher voltage by speeding up.
>
> So what if we now built a Faraday motor out of copper only, no iron or
> permanent magnets.
> So take an electromagnet (big loop DC, copper only), it will be
> stationary, imagine your looking at it's N pole now with electron drift
> in a cw direction, take a copper disk on an axle (or pool of mercury)
> place it inside the hoop coil and apply a negative DC source to the
> center taking the current off at the edges with brushes, the disk will
> rotate in a ccw direction but there will be no back EMF, if you instead
> tried to use it in generator mode it simply would not work rotated in a
> ccw direction no voltage would be generated because the voltage induced
> in the disk would be equal and opposite to the voltage induced in the
> brushes and external circuit because the rotation has made no change!
>
> Here is another thought, if moving faster doesn't increase the force
> what if we put a very high resistance thin wire and a big fat wire (or a
> multicore) of equal lengths, wound them together connecting them in
> series so that when a current is passed through they cancel creating no
> detectable B field.
> However while the same number of charges will be passing through any
> point of this strange coil the electron drift in one should be much
> faster but there should be fewer moving charges, they should see the
> magnetic field produced by the electromagnet in that Faraday motor
> differently! (lets say the fat part has 10,000 electrons moving at 1 m/s
> per mm of wire, the thin part having 1,000 electrons moving at 10,000
> m/s per mm of wire, as the higher speed doesn't lead to increased EMF
> from cutting of the lines all that really matters is that there are 10
> times more electron moving in the fat part creating x10 stronger force.
> (assuming that the coil (in this case the one we used for the Faraday
> motor) has the same electron drift speed as the fat part)
>
>
> So while this coil wouldn't create a magnetic field it would react to
> one, though at this moment I'm not sure the other coil would be
> effected!!!!! (unidirectional motion????????)
>
> Could it be that iron and permanent magnets have been screwing up up all
> this time?
>
> I'd love replies to this but please I haven't used any equations and
> would generally rather not get a reply in equation form or at least not
> the bulk of it.
> (unless it is well explained)