The magnetic field model is flawed

[Allcanadian]

I found the lines of force form of notation to be similar to topographical lines. It's a rough and approximate estimate of the change but leaves out all the finer details.

I also used a hall effect sensor to map the magnetic field and came to conclusions similar to this video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lbMTLfzmPo
X/Y/Field 3D Magnetic Field Mapping System

As we can see in reality the magnetic field bears little resemblance to what we were taught or the calculated/simulated version. I also mapped the field using the sensor on the plane shown and turned 180 degrees to show both the vertical and horizontal structure.

Howard Johnson who supposedly built a working magnetic motor used a field force model similar to mine shown below. This based on the fact an ordinary piece of iron wire placed horizontal to the magnet field center (bloch wall) is strongly attracted to either pole. In effect the force feels like repulsion because there is almost no magnetism at the center between the poles. A sheet of magnetic field viewing material also shows the same phenomena as a white line at the field center.

Thus we must conclude the conventional model is severely flawed to the point it is almost meaningless. We cannot have multiple other instances where the measurement shows a completely different result and still believe the conventional model is valid.

Even more unbelievable is the fact almost everyone just followed the conventional model and failed to "check there premise".  How does this even happen?. 100 years pass and still nobody has a clue what a magnetic field form actually looks like?, I find that hard to believe. There lies the problem doesn't it?, nobody has been checking there premise or the foundation on which the premise was built.

Regards
AC

[Allcanadian]

Here is an example of Earths magnetic field which was accurately mapped...

Here we could note the real magnetic field structure bears literally no resemblance to the picture everyone has in there head which they were taught. As well, it's not as if the standard model got some points wrong it got almost everything wrong. How can this be?...

You may want to recheck your premise and throw all those simulators in the trash where they belong. I have no interest in a simulated reality... I want the real deal.

Regards
AC

[partzman]

Errr, your pix of the earth's magnetic field is a little misleading as it is a map of predicted annual rate of change of vertical intensity for 2020.0-2025.0 .

Below is a map of the earth's vertical intensity at 2020.0 .

These are taken from-

http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html

I think I'll hang on to my simulators for a while longer!

Pm

[PhysicsProf]

  Interesting, Jon!

  Do you have this map from about 2 years ago, to provide a comparison?  I understand the magnetic poles are MOVING...

Thanks!

[Allcanadian]

Partzman
I believe your correct about the picture however that's not really the point...

The field measurements show a non uniform field structure when based on actual sensor data. It is never the same as a simulation showing uniform and symetrical lines. In fact the picture you posted based on sensor data proves as much showing a non uniform field structure.

The fact is without real sensor data a simulator would probably model the Earth like a bar magnet. The same flawed picture found in every textbook. As we can see this is not even remotely close to what is actually happening in reality.

AC

[Smudge]

Partzman
I believe your correct about the picture however that's not really the point...

The field measurements show a non uniform field structure when based on actual sensor data. It is never the same as a simulation showing uniform and symetrical lines. In fact the picture you posted based on sensor data proves as much showing a non uniform field structure........ As we can see this is not even remotely close to what is actually happening in reality.

No one expects the dipole model at the earth's center to yield perfect results at the surface.  But that plot of vertical field is certainly close to dipole-like in the northern hemisphere and not too different in the southern one.  Vertical field getting close to zero at the equator is to be expected for the dipole model and is at complete odds with the findings of Howard Johnson that show a maximum there.  Methinks your arguments are flawed.

Smudge

[JimBoot]

Errr, your pix of the earth's magnetic field is a little misleading as it is a map of predicted annual rate of change of vertical intensity for 2020.0-2025.0 .

Below is a map of the earth's vertical intensity at 2020.0 .

These are taken from-

http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html

I think I'll hang on to my simulators for a while longer!

Pm

what is the suns role in this?

[partzman]

  Interesting, Jon!

  Do you have this map from about 2 years ago, to provide a comparison?  I understand the magnetic poles are MOVING...

Thanks!

I didn't do an extensive search so I don't really know if there is any historical data.  What is interesting to me is that I have an RLE bench device that has slight gain in the 1.05-1.15 range and it varies from time to time in a manner that I can't understand or predict.  With the obvious variations in the earth's magnetic field over time and location, I'm thinking I should build a Helmholtz coil pair with the DUT located in the homogeneous magnetic field and check the results!

Pm

[Allcanadian]

smudge

No one expects the dipole model at the earth's center to yield perfect results at the surface.  But that plot of vertical field is certainly close to dipole-like in the northern hemisphere and not too different in the southern one. 

It depends on how you define close, is six or seven hundred miles out... close?.

Vertical field getting close to zero at the equator is to be expected for the dipole model and is at complete odds with the findings of Howard Johnson that show a maximum there.  Methinks your arguments are flawed.

My arguments are not based on any given dogma more so logic and reason.

Logically the better model should produce better results. We know Howard Johnson and many others using a different model supposedly built many working magnetic motors. You seem to be arguing you have the better model but cannot produce any positive results therefore we have our answer don't we?. So belief never enters the equation and I would call it exploring all my options.

It's important to understand we cannot really prove anything only gather evidence. The evidence we have suggests those who were using a different model produced different and often better results. As well, my observation is that many seem to be doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Which begs the question... why would I believe as you do and repeat your mistakes knowing it cannot produce the result I want?.

I think George Carlin nailed it... Question Everything.

Regards
AC