PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2026-08-14, 21:53:25
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15
Author Topic: Transformer Induction  (Read 41578 times)

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
ok. so the deflection is due to a relationship between the 'magnetic' field and the 'electron'
The motion between the magnetic field and the electron.

...nothing more.  correct?
Not only - the motion of the observer comes into play, too.

When the observer is not moving wrt the electron then the electron appears as the source of an electric field only.
However, the same electron appears as the source of magnetic field when the observer is moving wrt this electron.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
1.  is there an efield associated with a non changing, non moving magnetic field?
No, but there is an electric field associated with non-moving charges (e.g. ions).

2.  if not, then why?
This is a very basic question. "Basic" does not mean easy.  Understanding it requires the prerequisite understanding what a charge is and what a field is and what is the root cause of the difference between electric, magnetic and gravitation fields.  All of that requires understanding what space and time are. Mainstream science treats these as axioms. Geometric algebra and projective geometry help a lot.  I don't think you will appreciate them.

3.  when a magnetic field does move or change, why does this efield as described and use of its term in this thread and many others, happen to 'appear' and exist when that magnetic field moves or changes??
I could just reply "because of relativity" or "because Maxwel's equations say so", but without understanding the axioms mentioned in pt.2, you will not be satisfied.  These tools will tell you how fields behave and how they depend on each other but they will not tell you why and what they are, e.g. Coulomb's law will tell you how much charges attract or repel as a function of distance but it will not tell you what a charge is or what space is.

4.  and finally, does this efield only present itself when a wire or any conductor is present in the changing magnetic field??
No.
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
"Not only - the motion of the observer comes into play, too."

nothing else?   efield??

mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
nothing else?   efield??
I thought we were discussing only the deflection in the TV CRT.

Yes, the path of the electron is also affected by electric and gravitational fields in addition to the magnetic field and the relative motion of the observer.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
ok.  but im talking about the efield specifically and its definition of it only being there when the magnetic field is changing.  not sure why, but im feeling im either being misunderstood, or replies to my question are ignoring the core of the question.

ok. ill make it simple one more time..

1.  is there an efield associated with a non changing, non moving magnetic field?
2.  if not, then why?
3.  when a magnetic field does move or change, why does this efield as described and use of its term in this thread and many others, happen to 'appear' and exist when that magnetic field moves or changes??
4.  and finally, does this efield only present itself when a wire or any conductor is present in the changing magnetic field??


i see that it is used in theory as to calculating 'voltage' per turn when considering self induction and mutual induction, but i find that nobody really wants to answer the questions or claim that they dont understand the questions. my questions ar not that complicated.

mags

I will attempt to answer your question-

1) Yes, electrostatics provide us with a scalar E-Field.

3) According to classical electrodynamics, the E-Field appears due to E=-dA/dt .  IOW, the E-Field is generated by a change in the A-Field or the magnetic vector potential. 

4) The E-Field is always present and will manifest itself in a wire located in the field via charge separation.

Pm 
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
I will attempt to answer your question-

4) The E-Field is always present and will manifest itself in a wire located in the field via charge separation.

pm.  your answer number 4.  are we saying the magnet nor the wire needs to be moving and the efield is there?

mags
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
pm.  your answer number 4.  are we saying the magnet nor the wire needs to be moving and the efield is there?

mags

My answer for 4) was poorly constructed.  It should have read-

4)  When conditions exist for the electromagnetic production of an E-Field, the field will always be present and will manifest itself in a wire located in the field via charge separation.

Pm
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4748
Please remove if too off topic
Here a poster at Mooker made a new thread with a claim
Screen shot below
Be advised link he attached went to second screen shot ( notified Jim already)

Claims strange gain mechanism 650 times with no grounding ( capacitor experiment)

Respectfully submitted
Chet
Ps for additional clarity!! link at above post is connected to malware !!
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
My answer for 4) was poorly constructed.  It should have read-

4)  When conditions exist for the electromagnetic production of an E-Field, the field will always be present and will manifest itself in a wire located in the field via charge separation.

Pm

well my theory is that it is all a relationship between the magnetic field and the electron. and that gives the illusion or the impression that this efield is attached or comes along with the magnetic field, as you say, at all times. 

and if you think more on what you have said twice in answer 4 and the newly constructed answer 4, "the field will always be present and will 'manifest itself' in a wire located in the field via charge separation", then it shouldnt be hard to think that what i stated as my theory, that it is all just a relationship between the magnetic field and the electron, and nothing more.   ;)  except for one thing.. and i would like anyone to demonstrate a stationary magnet and a stationary wire showing a manifestation of an efield.  you didnt specify the 'when conditions exist' part....

as you say 'manifest itself',  then really it either doesnt exist, and from what i get from the the idea of the efield that you guys present, that the efield cant be detected unless the magnetic field is moving/changing, or the wire moving or changing position, then i believe that the efield that is said to 'coexist' with the magnetic field at all times is malarky by definition.  and, i believe that if we can detect the efield, of which indicates potential difference, of which you choose to use the words charge separation, then i can say that yes, the efield can and will 'only appear' as potential difference from one end of that wire to the other due to the magnetic fields interaction with the electrons in that wire. nothing more.

mags

   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
well my theory is that it is all a relationship between the magnetic field and the electron. and that gives the illusion or the impression that this efield is attached or comes along with the magnetic field, as you say, at all times.

Referring to my toroid experiments, preset theory says there is no magnetic field in the hole of the toroid except for a small leakage flux, however, CE (classical electrodynamics) says there is an A-Field (magnetic vector potential) in the hole that varies with the current in the primary and this A-Field produces the E-Field.

Quote
and if you think more on what you have said twice in answer 4 and the newly constructed answer 4, "the field will always be present and will 'manifest itself' in a wire located in the field via charge separation", then it shouldnt be hard to think that what i stated as my theory, that it is all just a relationship between the magnetic field and the electron, and nothing more.   ;)  except for one thing.. and i would like anyone to demonstrate a stationary magnet and a stationary wire showing a manifestation of an efield.

Edit:  If at any time one would add a load to a charge separated wire, one would have electron flow as a result but of course you already know that.

I don't know of any such experiment but perhaps someone else here may!

Quote

you didnt specify the 'when conditions exist' part....

AFIK, a voltage across an inductor can only be produced by one of two ways and that is, transformer induction or by passing a PM past the coil.  I was referring to the former.

Quote
as you say 'manifest itself',  then really it either doesnt exist, and from what i get from the the idea of the efield that you guys present, that the efield cant be detected unless the magnetic field is moving/changing, or the wire moving or changing position, then i believe that the efield that is said to 'coexist' with the magnetic field at all times is malarky by definition.  and, i believe that if we can detect the efield, of which indicates potential difference, of which you choose to use the words charge separation, then i can say that yes, the efield can and will 'only appear' as potential difference from one end of that wire to the other due to the magnetic fields interaction with the electrons in that wire. nothing more.

With my toroid experiments, I refer to charge separation because the E-Field that is present separates any free charges in the wire or any object that consists of free charges.  I have charge separated semiconductors, ferrites, electrolytes, etc.  The claim of all this work is that the charge separation, or the evident E-Field, exists only between the upper and lower surfaces or a rectangular toroid.  This shouldn't be according to CE.  Also as I stated above, there is no magnetic field in the center of the toroid except for a small leakage flux but most is contained in the core.

Pm

Quote
mags
« Last Edit: 2026-07-17, 20:18:00 by partzman »
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
Please remove if too off topic
Here a poster at Mooker made a new thread with a claim
Screen shot below
Be advised link he attached went to second screen shot ( notified Jim already)

Claims strange gain mechanism 650 times with no grounding ( capacitor experiment)

Respectfully submitted
Chet
Ps for additional clarity!! link at above post is connected to malware !!

That link at Mooker's site no longer seems to work!

Pm
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
"With my toroid experiments, I refer to charge separation because the E-Field that is present separates any free charges in the wire or any object that consists of free charges."

free charges..  so in a wire, just a wire alone, there are free charges?  im used to hearing it as free electrons.. has something changed more recently that the word electrons has been replaced by charges?

mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
...has something changed more recently that the word electrons has been replaced by charges?
No but other charge carriers are mentioned less frequently.
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
How should we define 'charge carriers'?

mags
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
I could look it up... I just want your reference for the sake of our discussion... ;)

mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
How should we define 'charge carriers'?
Any particle that carries an electric charge: electrons, positrons, protons, muons, ions, alphas, Cooper pairs, polarons, solitons, pions, kaons.
Larger structural charge carriers are also possible, e.g. Lycopodium spores and holes in semiconductors.
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Any particle that carries an electric charge: electrons, positrons, protons, muons, ions, alphas, Cooper pairs, polarons, solitons, pions, kaons.
Larger structural charge carriers are also possible, e.g. Lycopodium spores and holes in semiconductors.

so in pm's case when he talks about free charge carriers in wire it is electrons, correct?  also when the wire is not induced or not connected to input electrically, the electron are not free at these times, correct?

mags
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
so in pm's case when he talks about free charge carriers in wire it is electrons, correct?  also when the wire is not induced or not connected to input electrically, the electron are not free at these times, correct?

mags

When the piece of wire is charge separated, we will find electrons bunched up, so to speak, at the negative terminal and protons at the positive terminal.  If we connect an external resistive load to the wire outside the core, we will then see a current flow that will be called one of two types depending on one's view. 

One type is conventional current flow where the reference is the flow of positive charge from the positive terminal to the negative.  In semiconductors this is called 'hole flow'.

The other type is just called 'current flow' or 'electron flow' which is referencing a flow from negative to positive.

If the load however is placed in the hole of the toroid along with the wire, there is equal charge separation in both the wire and the load with the result being no current flow no matter which type of reference you choose.

Pm
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
When the piece of wire is charge separated, we will find electrons bunched up, so to speak, at the negative terminal and protons at the positive terminal.  If we connect an external resistive load to the wire outside the core, we will then see a current flow that will be called one of two types depending on one's view.

absolutely!  im with you there..   years ago messing with AV plug and charging a cap via 1 wire from 1 lead of the sec of a small hv 1200v neon transformer is where i came to that conclusion. so i ask this...

do you believe that on the neg end of that sec(at the time that the ac out is at peak neg), 1200v, that the bunched up neg charge would release some into that av plug to charge up that cap, 'as if it were just an extension of that sec winding'?  lets say even further, that sec hv lead wire coming out of that hv transformer, would it also contain bunched up electrons?  further more, extend that wire to a greater length, would there be bunched up electrons in that extended wire also?

One type is conventional current flow where the reference is the flow of positive charge from the positive terminal to the negative.  In semiconductors this is called 'hole flow'.

"hole flow"  definition of a 'hole' is a valence band electron missing from an atom, of which makes that atom positively charged.  are you saying that the hole itself flows or that the atom itself flows?
when an atom is normal, equal amount of electrons and protons give that atom a neutral charge. remove an electron and the atom becomes positively charged. thus in my thinking, the pos end of that wire is just filled with atoms in the wire structure that have a pos charge and nothing more. just missing electrons on that pos end.
if you are talking about 'ions', atoms with a non neutral charge, moving through an electrolyte, then we are not talking about wires.

If the load however is placed in the hole of the toroid along with the wire, there is equal charge separation in both the wire and the load with the result being no current flow no matter which type of reference you choose.

thats understandable. as both the load and the wire of the loop are induced equally.  but, as i believe you said earlier, i think, you can measure the top of the loop and the bottom, each out of the window of the core, and see voltage, similarly like just 2 wires connected at top and connected at bottom, where in our case the load is like one of the wires. so there should be say bunched up electrons at one connection of the loop out one side of the window, and pos charge(atoms with holes) at the connection on the other side of the window. if so, then you did have current flow to get those electrons to one end of that loop that is outside of that end of the window.  maybe not a lo but current flow did happen both in the wire and the load of the loop.

mags
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
missed one part of what i wanted to say as i was interrupted here at work...  here is the total part of my previous post...

When the piece of wire is charge separated, we will find electrons bunched up, so to speak, at the negative terminal and 'protons at the positive termina'l.  If we connect an external resistive load to the wire outside the core, we will then see a current flow that will be called one of two types depending on one's view.

absolutely!  im with you there.. 

here is what i didnt get into...

so, do protons themselves leave the nucleus and flow through the wire in your understanding?

mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
so in pm's case when he talks about free charge carriers in wire it is electrons, correct? 
Correct.

also when the wire is not induced or not connected to input electrically, the electrons are not free at these times, correct?
Incorrect.
They are free to move but only within the confines of the space occupied by the metal. 
They can't get out of that space unless other conditions are satisfied, e.g.: thermionic emission, photoelectric emission (photoemission), field emission (cold emission), secondary emission (when energetic particles strike the electrode), Schottky (field-enhanced thermionic) hybrid emission, photoionization, etc...

In my opinion the electrons confined to matter are fundamentally different particles than electrons ejected outside of matter  ...but that is a heresy in mainstream science.
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241

Incorrect.
They are free to move but only within the confines of the space occupied by the metal. 
They can't get out of that space unless other conditions are satisfied, e.g.: thermionic emission, photoelectric emission (photoemission), field emission (cold emission), secondary emission (when energetic particles strike the electrode), Schottky (field-enhanced thermionic) hybrid emission, photoionization, etc...

In my opinion the electrons confined to matter are fundamentally different particles than electrons ejected outside of matter  ...but that is a heresy in mainstream science.

if you are saying electrons are free to move around the nucleus of the say copper atom, then i agree.  but you seem to imply that there are more electrons free to go where they will throughout the wire, with no bond to the copper element atoms.
are these free electrons you speak of broken from their bonds of the copper atoms and do as they please without external influence, or are you saying that all the copper atoms of the wire have all their electrons, making those atoms of neutral electrical charge, but there are other free electrons in the wire? extra electrons in the wire than what is required to make all the copper atoms whole?


and your opinion of different kinds of electrons..  what has given you the idea of that opinion?

  i have some opinions myself about electrons. an alternate theory to put it bluntly.  my idea has more to do with how the electrons do what they do when they interact with a magnetic field rather than an efield related directly to the magnetic field that supposedly only 'manifests' itself when the mag field moves or changes only if there is a say wire for example being affected by the moving mag field, and or oppositely when a conductor moves within a stationary mag field.  id say that the efield that manifests is brought about by the magnetically affected electron, rather than directly from the moving magnetic field itself. if the magnetic field moves on its own without any, lets just say, wires in the vicinity, and the efield cannot be detected there, then i find that harder to believe than my theory.  im not doubting there is an efield. i believe it is associated or say comes directly from the wire itself rather than from the magnetic field itself.  it seems to be a more likely mechanism. id say the idea that there is an efield associated with the magnetic field comes from the fact that the electron moves at 90deg of the moving magnetic field. but i believe that the electrons have a magnetic field themselves. and their reaction to magnetic fields has to do with that rather than an efield that exists with with the magnetic field itself.  my theory makes more sense that the efield only manifests 'from' in the wire when reacting to the magnetic field.



but id like to here your opinion of more than one kind of electron.

mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4856
...but you seem to imply that there are more electrons free to go where they will throughout the wire, with no bond to the copper element atoms.
If there were more electrons than protons then the copper lump would not be electrically neutral and would have a net electric charge, i.e. it would make your hair stand up if you touched it.
Also, if the electrons inside a lump of metal have negative charge and can move freely then they should all repel themselves to the surface of that metal, shouldn't they ?
Unless the free electrons inside metals are not electrically charged...

...what has given you the idea of that opinion?
I have developed my own physical paradigm which is at odds with mainstream science and unacceptable to most people because it upends their cherished ideas about space and time as a 3D+1D container and everything follows from that.  I don't want to convince anyone about its merits.  Most are not ready to abandon the comfort of the ST aquarium anyway.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2434
The significant thing about electrons in conductors is that they do become detached from the atoms and whiz about randomly at great speed (Fermi velocitty) but they do not move very far unless there is an externally applied electric field.  The random movement gives rise to electrical signals measured as voltage across the length of the conductor known as thermal noise.  It is these detached electrons that then obtain the small drift velocity when an E field is present.

Smudge
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2307
missed one part of what i wanted to say as i was interrupted here at work...  here is the total part of my previous post...

absolutely!  im with you there.. 

here is what i didnt get into...

so, do protons themselves leave the nucleus and flow through the wire in your understanding?

mags

Let's say our wire has no outside influence from any type of field or heat source so that the atoms in the wire are basically charge balanced.  We would therefore have a net zero potential measured across the ends.  Now, let's place the wire in a charge separation environment.  This will result in a separation of the electrons from the atoms and they will collect in one end of the wire that becomes negative.  This electron deficiency around the nucleus leaves the remaining protons and/or neutrons on the other end of the wire that produces the positive end.  Yes, I do believe that these electron deficient protons will move in the wire.

Pm 
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2026-08-14, 21:53:25