Ok, you need to consider my answer if you want to understand this. You are assuming that a thing called a magnetic field really exists and this is the reason for your problem.
Consider first how to interact with of detect magnetic fields, first take the Neutron, what reaction does it have to a magnetic field? As far as I am aware, essentially none. Ok so what else is matter made up of, ok Protons and electrons, so how do these particles with electrical potential react to a magnetic field? By default they don't! Ok, so if you are moving the charges relatively to the magnetic field then what happens? Well if cutting across the so called magnetic field they feel a force perpendicular to the magnetic field and in a direction based on their electrical sign. So in an EM wave we have electrons and protons feel a force at right angles to the so called magnetic component, in other words they feel the electric component. So what can be detected on the magnetic axis? NOTHING. Of course a magnet will align it's self to the magnetic axis, but why is this? Well if you consider an air core electromagnet turned off it shows no reaction to the magnetic field, not if you put DC through it, it will respond by aligning with the external magnetic field, however if we look at each element of this coil we find that the force is placed on moving electrons because they are cutting through the magnetic field, the force on the electrons is perpendicular to the magnetic field. Ok, so an electromagnet feeling any "magnetic" force is really just an illusion. And the same is true of ferrous materials where the magnetic field is again created by moving charges. Ok, so how come magnetic fields exist only to establish an electric component at 90 degrees? Well consider what makes magnetic fields is: moving charges, and what feels magnetic fields is: moving charges. And what they feel is perpendicular and dependent on the sign of the moving charge. So if we look at moving charges, can we understand how these forces can arise? Actually YES! If you look at every source of a magnetic field you can calculate the expected force by looking solely at how motion is distorting the electric field. Ok, so in a piece of wire the protons and electrons are in about the same number and their electric fields sum to zero outside the wire (the electric field from every particle in your body stretches out to infinity), then if you apply a time varying electric field to the wire the mobile electrons wiggle back and fourth. This movement effects their field in much the same way that wiggling a hose makes the stream bend. The protons aren't wiggling so you can now look at what would happen from having electric fields from the electrons in a wire bent as it carries out into space: /\/\/\/\/\/\/\|/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ This clearly shows how the electric component comes about. Ok, so how about a DC electromagnet with an air core? Well what happens when matter moves? Well since Einstein and before the answer is that contraction of length takes place. So if we have a wire and move the electrons but not the protons, what should happen to the electrons field? It should be squashed, so consider the spherical field around an electron, imagine now lots of electrons in a row like peals on a necklace, look at the vectors of force from that electric field. Look at how any field lines not perpendicular to this train of electrons is cancelled by the other electrons fields, now if you were to pancake these electric fields a bit less field at the sides would be wasted and cancelled between them, and more in the perpendicular direction. I hope you are able to visualize this, this would create an unmasked electric field of sorts, this electric field also should exist and has been experimentally measured to exist as the Hooper Motional E field and it should exist even if you look on magnetic fields as real. Now I can hear you asking how this creates any illusion of a magnetic field, well let's now look at another parallel section of wire carrying a current, now there are different ways to view this as it is very much multi choice, however the moving electrons in this other wire for arguments sake are moving in the same direction and they may not see those electrons as pancaked, instead they see the protons in the other wire as pancaking and attracting them toward the other wire. Meanwhile the protons in this wire are seeing the electrons in the other wire as pancaking and attracting them. This gives rise to the expected forces, only we have looked at the charges and the electric field only. So please consider when talking about magnetism, only moving electric fields/charges create it, and only moving charges can feel it as an electric field at 90 degrees and in a direction dependent of their sign. This is as far as I am aware considered conventional and accepted. John, an INTJ (I feel this post should be proof read, but I can't be bothered :) On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: > You're right Terry, I don't like your answer! > > And I don't think any of the other explanations answered the question > adequately... > > From my purely physical model, it would be a natural cause-effect > relationship due to a polarizable > vacuum... i.e., the electric and magnetic fields of mainstream physics are > simply a result of the > polarization of the local vacuum, and how particles respond to that > polarization. > > With all the sophistication and accuracy to umpteen decimal places in > atomic physics/QM, how come we > can't explain WHY they're perpendicular! I think any theory should have to > explain the simple > observations first before delving down into more difficult and esoteric > aspects of physics. > > -Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 11:37 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Why are the electric and magnetic fields perpendicular? > > You are not going to like my answer: "Because it is their nature." > > Yeah. Told you. > > It is best understood by studying the Lorentz Force and working your way > from there. I like this > site: > > http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html (click on the bubble > to expand) > > but, there's always Wikipedia. > > Now Brian Greene would have me say "Because it is their nature in this > universe." > > T > >
