I like FractalWoman's opinion and video on the subject.
https://youtu.be/vTV1EVb-V2c?si=U1-pLdzwINKitSzv
bi
edit
Quote by FractalWoman:
"This video is a quasi-review of a paper called "The Quantum Field of a Magnet" by Emmanouil Markoulakis. Although it might seem like I am picking on the author in this video (and I am a little), that is not why I am doing this. In reality, EM and I have the same goal in mind. We both want to understand how the ferrocell works. EM thinks I am misguided and I think he is misguided. But the only thing that really matters (and the only thing that anyone cares about) is the demonstrable truth and not some hypothetical truth that is impossible to prove.
Computer simulations are a kind of proof. If you can't demonstrate your "theory" via computer simulations, then it is of no use to me. I am a computer scientist. I have been for a long time. I need logic, I need clarity, and I NEED CODE, in order to fully understand a concept. When I wanted to understand the torus knot, I wrote some code. When I wanted to understand Ionel Dinu's Aether circulation model, I wrote some code.
AB's CODE clearly demonstrated TO ME how the ferrocell works. It is not an over simplification in my opinion, nor is it a "cartoon". It is the real deal. This is exactly what I was looking for (and what the other ferrocell researchers were unable to produce). In my mind, a computer simulation of the ferrocell is the BEST way to show how a ferrocell works and AB's simulation succeeds in every case that I try. So, in terms of understanding HOW a ferrocell works, I am satisfied with the results. "
It's a well presented video and interesting to note the author claims the center is not a bloch wall and there is no term for the phenomena. The effect acts like a bloch wall but is not a separation of magnetic domains by definition which I agree with. The fact that the effect doesn't even have a name is telling in itself. The logic is also debatable, the author claims the effect is not a bloch wall then goes on to show the magnetic domain structure in a magnet. However, the effect is not in the magnet but external to it as a magnetic field effect. The actual problem here is easy to explain. The author supposes one field property or polarity transitions into a different one with no transition. In science this is heresy and literally the equivalent of getting something from nothing imo. As I explained prior, this is like saying the color black becomes white with no transition. A transition defined as a "change" in state, property or form. In other words the claim is that something changed but didn't change. There is a simple test to prove the effect imo. Take a thin strip of iron and try to hold it near the center of the magnet between the poles. The iron strip has an extreme force away from the center towards either pole. What does this tell us?. This tells me there is very little if any magnetic field near the center transition point. The iron strip always moves away from the weakest part of a magnetic field towards the strongest part of the field. Which makes sense because a N pole cannot become a S pole without transitioning to zero in the process. Very similar to an AC sine wave where the negative electric field polarity drops to zero, the zero crossing, in order to become a positive polarity. As such what were seeing in the center of the magnet is a "zero crossing". It applies to magnetic and electric fields.
---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
|
feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
Author
Topic: New magnetic field model (Read 170 times)
