Ideas for Applications and Animations

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Sun Aug 23, 2015 11:56 pm

The discussion about charge emission in the Atomic Viewer thread has given me the idea to build yet another app to demonstrate the charge emission of a single proton (or any charged particle, really). I already have a basic system up and running (it is just so easy to copy one of my other apps and change it to be something new) that shows the central particle and a set of charge streams about its equator and the spinning charge as it flows along those streams. I thought I would create this new thread for any ideas anyone might have about concepts that could benefit from some kind of application or animation. It doesn't matter how large or small it is, just record the ideas here and we can discuss them and see where they lead. I like the idea of a series of little apps that help people understand Miles work.

To be clear, this thread is to record and discuss the ideas and how we can visualise them. Once they have matured into a project they will get their own thread much like the existing Atomic Viewer and Stacked Spin apps. In spite of the title, the ideas do not have to be limited to applications. They could be better suited to a video or images. The important thing is to get the ideas out there and everyone thinking about them and how we can help others to understand them (and ourselves too).
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:56 pm

My first suggestion is an orbital simulator. Using the unified field eqns, you can start with a random distribution (even 3-d) of stellar material, and show how orbits, and a solar system can develop. Ideally, we can model our own system and demonstrate its hazards (i.e. Mars outside of the Earth's orbit).

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Wed Aug 26, 2015 1:28 am

I share this dream, Airman.

I actually did build this type of app a few years ago. It had all the planets (including Pluto) and their moons. I ended up taking all the parameters I could find, orbital distance and velocity, precession, etc, and animated the planets rotating about the sun and the moons about their planets. Put textures on the sun and all of the planets and any moons that I could find. It did look pretty good.

Then I tried to apply Miles math to it and discover the overall velocity vector for each planet which it would show above it as an arrow. It didn't work out too well and I haven't looked at it in years.

The main problem with this app is the complexity. Each of Miles papers on astronomy seem easy enough but you have to combine them all together and worse, you have to find the correct way to express the equations. That is what I have found the hardest about building these applications. Miles is writing for Physics and Physicists so his math often deals with problems created by or measurements made by people. I am trying to build a model that expresses the math and so the math itself is a little bit different or I have to find the correct place to apply it and my objects must have the capacity to implement that math, etc.

Still, I think this is a very important application and I will try again. We should gather up links to all of the relevant papers and quote important sections in posts here. Let's sort out what we have to apply and then I may see a clear way to implement it.

When posting material here that is specific to a particular idea, I recommend using the 'Respond' button (actually 'Repondre' on my view of the site, not sure why it's in French) which will allow you to specify a Title for that post. If this contains the general name of the idea you are posting about then it will make them easier to find later.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Magnetism of an Electric Current

Post by Nevyn on Wed Apr 05, 2017 8:01 pm

As mentioned in another thread, I have some ideas on building an app to show the magnetism on a wire. I realised that my view of magnetism in this scenario was a bit wrong. I was thinking that if the electric current was flowing along the Z axis, say, then the magnetism was caused by photons being emitted perpendicular to that, so in the XY plane. After a quick read of Miles' How Magnetism Works paper, I realised that it does not work that way, but is just the spin on the photons flowing along the wire, so in the Z dimension in my example.

If the photons are moving in the Z dimension, then the photons are also spinning about the Z dimension and this creates a torque around the Z dimension and we call that torque magnetism. This is a lot easier to model than my previous idea of how it works. This does mean that the photons are also outside of the wire, not just inside of it. Otherwise, the magnetic field would not be felt outside of the wire.

I plan to model this with a collection of spheres to represent the photons. It will have a length and diameter that represents the size of the wire and a second diameter to represent the extent of the magnetic field. It will have a density that sets the number of photons. Each photon will travel from one end of the wire to the other, move back to the start and then repeat. Each photon will be spinning as it travels down the wire.

I will probably represent the wire by a solid cylinder as we really only want to see the photon outside of the wire. I might make the cylinder transparent so that you can see that photons are traveling inside of it too.

I can model alternating current as well. This is just a reversal of the spin on each photon as they leave the starting point. This does mean that each photon needs to take care of its own spin, I can't just spin them all the same (but I could do that with DC, but won't).

I need to position the photons such that they are denser in the center and are less dense as you move outwards from that. I might let the density specify the density inside of the wire and then calculate the densities for the outside. I will split the volume outside of the wire into N sections and each section gets its own density. Actually, I really need to set the outside diameter based on the density. The more dense the further out the magnetic field can be felt. I'll have to play with it to see how I can get that working correctly.

Once that is built, I want to create another version that contains two wires and let the user select which way the currents are flowing and their distance apart. This will show the meeting of the two streams and this will cause some headaches for me as I will need to think about how to model the collisions to show attraction and repulsion of those magnetic fields.

How does that happen? Just by the relative spin directions of the photons. We have a left wire and a right wire (looking down the axis of these wires). When the wires are carrying current in the same direction, let's say into the screen, then the photons belonging to the left wire that are on the right side of it will be spinning down and the photons from the right wire on the left side of it will be spinning up. When such photons collide, their spin vectors stack (or add) and this causes a force between them and they will fly off according to those forces. Less photons means less repulsion which means apparent attraction.

When the current is moving in opposite directions, then the left wire's photons that are on the right side of it will be spinning up, say, and the right wire's photons that are on the left side of it are also spinning up (or they could both be down, depending on the direction of the current), so there is no relative velocity between them and therefore no force, so the photons remain where they are and cause a density increase which creates a repulsion between the wires.

That's how I am seeing it at the moment. If anyone has other ideas, then please, let us know what you think. One question I have is if the photons outside of the wires are emitted by the current source or are they just ambient field photons that are induced to spin by the current in the wires. I don't think it matters for this app, but I am curious.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LloydK on Thu Apr 06, 2017 4:49 am

Nevyn said: One question I have is if the photons outside of the wires are emitted by the current source or are they just ambient field photons that are induced to spin by the current in the wires. I don't think it matters for this app, but I am curious.
I presume there'd be both, but I'm not clear on Miles' view on photon speed. Originally, I think he considered it possible that photons can slow down, but then they'd collide with the main ambient field and get pushed up to speed. But did he decide later than they can only go c? And similarly, can photon spins only go c? If so, why? Simulate? Light is said to be considerably slower in glass, water etc. Maybe that's another thing that should be simulated. You mention photons moving inside the wires, which would be similar to going through glass or water. So I assume that those photons too would be slowed down, maybe more than through glass. The photons moving through wire would be smaller photons than visible light apparently. If electricity moves at the speed of light, is it because it involves mostly photons outside of the wire? Also, does light go faster in space than in the atmosphere? I guess it would be easy to find out by measuring light speed from the Moon to Earth and to a satellite at the same distance.

LloydK

Posts : 407
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:46 am

I don't have a solid answer for the speed of photons. The way I try to see it is that in order to be called a photon, it must be moving at c. Things may be able to move slower, but then we wouldn't measure them and if we did, we wouldn't call them a photon. I think that in order to be slowed below c, it would need to be stripped of all of its spins, including the axial. So only BPhotons could go below c and if they did, then the chances of being hit by another particle is very large.

Why do they only spin at c? We may never know why, but we do know that photons are emitted at c and so we assume that the top level spin of the particle emitting it is responsible for that velocity. It actually could be all spins but the top level spin will contribute the most. It seems that once a spin level is at c, and with the right collision, it will gain a new spin instead of going faster. That may be just because the colliding particle is only traveling at c so it can't make it spin any faster because there is no relative difference in velocity and therefore no force. But if the collision happens on the right dimensions with respect to the top level spin, then it can use that force to create a new spin level. That is also why the new spin is on an axis that is orthogonal to the previous top level spin.

I haven't given the slowing of light through a medium much thought. The mainstream answer seemed plausible, even under Miles' model. You may be right though, it probably does deserve some deeper study.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LloydK on Thu Apr 06, 2017 2:32 pm

Nevyn said: So only BPhotons could go below c and if they did, then the chances of being hit by another particle is very large.
...
It seems that once a spin level is at c, and with the right collision, it will gain a new spin instead of going faster. That may be just because the colliding particle is only traveling at c so it can't make it spin any faster because there is no relative difference in velocity and therefore no force. But if the collision happens on the right dimensions with respect to the top level spin, then it can use that force to create a new spin level.
Do you mean photons traveling through water, glass etc travel a little slower than c because they get converted into B-photons by collision and then back into regular photons by collision and that the B-photons move slower, reducing the photon speed?

I thought photon collisions occurred mainly just in stars and maybe planets, because that's where photon density is great enough and that photons seldom collide in our atmosphere or in space. I guess solids and liquids might be dense enough for collisions to be more common than in air.

Did you say in recent weeks that protons etc only recycle B-photons? If so, then regular photons would have to be stripped of their spins and maybe lose speed before being sucked into the protons etc. Right? And then they're reconverted into regular photons as they're emitted. Right?

LloydK

Posts : 407
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Thu Apr 06, 2017 2:43 pm

.
My imagination is reeling after reading an action packed story of a hero and his friends saving the world from chaos, Scarecrow, by Matthew Reilly.

Oh, Magnetism of an Electric Current; how about ...

1) Create a wire. A single column of Cu atoms extending across the screen may be sufficient, an image, but a single column would require the most detail. For starters, it might be easier to display a lattice of several parallel Cu columns. The wire shown would be finer than any built by man.

2) Indicate charge flow. Use charge shaders along the wire length; in both directions, with higher density ‘positive’ current at twice the strength of the opposing ‘negative’ current; or display only the positive current. The shaders fill the screen, with maximum concentration or density along the wire. Drop the shader density as per 1/r^2 away from the wire. You might provide concentric magnetic field lines; this simulation should make it clear that the magnetic lines aren’t real, but are actually photon density boundary surfaces. I imagine the user can easily increase or decrease the shader density and field lines as with the change of a dial.
 
3) Include an electron current. They might be represented by another set of larger slower shaders, with their own drop off densities levels with respect to the wire. Or even better, simply limit electrons to a uniform density within the wire’s volume. A higher voltage would be indicated by increased electron density.

The above, I believe, would describe a DC model with a minimum computational demand. The simplest AC case I imagine would be to sinusoidally vary the intensity and directions of the DC model; i.e. electrons (or the shader representations) would keep cycling back and forth about their original locations within the wire. From our previous discussions, I guess shaders may not be suitable for the AC case.

4) Include a second parallel wire with selectable parallel, or anti-parallel current.

5) Show random local free electrons reacting to the wire pair’s combined charge field. The electrons will not change paths sharply (no high energy photons here yet), but will curve in response to the varying photonic bombardments in the combined charge field. I don’t believe the ambient charge field is necessary for this simulation. We can reduce the photon motion displayed to just those moving parallel with the wire, and individual photon collisions don't need to be shown.

////////////////////////////////////

Photons don't travel slower in solids, increased numbers tend to take longer aggregate component paths through the increased proton matter present which make it appear light travels slower in solids.

////////////////////////////////////

P.S. I'm still thinking along the above lines. A wire goes from edge to edge across our screen. Photons are also emitted radiall away from the wire. It seems to me they represent mainly wire losses. As an alternative, maximizing radial emissions occur when modeling antenna elements. A sim showing radiation patterns would be quite interesting.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Thu Apr 06, 2017 6:17 pm

Airman wrote:My imagination is reeling after reading an action packed story of a hero and his friends saving the world from chaos, Scarecrow, by Matthew Reilly.

I hope you read Ice Station and then Area 7 before Scarecrow. It wouldn't matter too much if you hadn't but that is the order they should be read in. I'm half way through re-reading Area 7 at the moment after just finishing Ice Station. I was going to wait a bit before starting this next one but just couldn't. They are just too damn good!

I did have some thoughts of trying to bring the atoms from AV into this app to show the wire atoms, but I think they might just get in the way. I might see what I an do after I get this version up and running. I made a start on it last night, but only copied an existing app and changed a few filenames and variable names. I didn't get much done because I couldn't leave Scarecrow in such a tight spot. Secret: Scarecrow is always in a tight spot! That's why you can't put these books down!

I wasn't going to use shaders in this app. Certainly not in the same way that I have used them in AV. I could use shaders to calculate the rotations, but I don't think it will help and that's because I would need to use spheres, not point particles. Shaders work on the geometry so they would need to rotate every single vertex of that sphere, for every sphere. If I do it in the app, I just need to rotate the whole sphere and ThreeJS will take care of rotating the geometry (which it would do in a shader, of sorts).

I might include electrons but they aren't really necessary to see the magnetic effects. It might be more of a statement if I leave out the electrons, just to show that it is the charge photons that do all of the work.

Yes, I could implement DC much easier than AC, but if I get AC working then DC is just a limited case of AC with no variation. I prefer one model that can handle two cases. Of course, if I find that it is computationally expensive, which I don't think it will be, then I might create a separate DC model.

I'm not sure if I will bring the ambient field into it or not. My question about whether the photons causing the magnetic field are from the current source or are from the ambient field will define whether I bring the ambient field into it or not. Right now, I am thinking it will just get in the way. Maybe I will end up with a simple, conceptual version using just charge photons and later, I create a fuller version that shows the ambient field and atoms in the wire, etc.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Thu Apr 06, 2017 6:32 pm

LloydK wrote:Do you mean photons traveling through water, glass etc travel a little slower than c because they get converted into B-photons by collision and then back into regular photons by collision and that the B-photons move slower, reducing the photon speed?

No, that is not what I meant. Those two statements were not related. Sorry if I gave that impression.

LloydK wrote:I thought photon collisions occurred mainly just in stars and maybe planets, because that's where photon density is great enough and that photons seldom collide in our atmosphere or in space. I guess solids and liquids might be dense enough for collisions to be more common than in air.

Photon collisions can and do occur anywhere, but they are more likely to occur in a dense photon environment, such as a star or planet. Stars have such a high density in their core that they can cause spin-ups and spin-downs quite often. However, the boundary of an atom, where its charge channels are emitting into the ambient field, are very dense and focused too. These can and do cause collisions and may even cause spin-ups and spin-downs. Some atoms are known to be electron emitters and these can be explained by this process. I also have a rather tentative theory that electrons can be created inside of the nucleus. How else could an electron get inside of the atom unless it was there when the atom formed? I even asked Miles about that idea years ago and he said that he had the same thought but didn't want to use it until he had some reason for it or something to explain with it.

LloydK wrote:Did you say in recent weeks that protons etc only recycle B-photons? If so, then regular photons would have to be stripped of their spins and maybe lose speed before being sucked into the protons etc. Right? And then they're reconverted into regular photons as they're emitted. Right?

I don't remember stating that protons only recycle BPhotons and I don't think that they do, so I am pretty sure I didn't mean that. Protons, or any charged particle, will channel what is available and that is, generally, infrared photons. I don't think protons change the charge all that much. Maybe a few spin-ups and downs here or there but not a regular occurrence. What they do is direct the charge and this creates an increased force about the equator, compared to the ambient field.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Thu Apr 06, 2017 6:42 pm

.
I must search further for Reilly's earlier books. Scarecrow was the one and only at the library and I wasn't ready to wait.

Nevyn wrote. My question about whether the photons causing the magnetic field are from the current source or are from the ambient field will define whether I bring the ambient field into it or not.

Magnetism is the result of a coherent photon source - the wire. I don't see how magnetism could ever be caused by ambient photons.

.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:45 pm

Not caused by the ambient field, but I am unsure if the current in the wire causes the ambient photons around that wire to spin in coherence with that current. The current is definitely the source of coherent spin and we know that the magnetic field is around the wire, so I just question how that arises. I don't want to assume that those photons around the wire actually come from the wire. When I wrote that question I just realised that those photons around the wire may be induced to spin rather than being put into the field with spin already. Evidence for this is the fact that the magnetic field takes some time to wind down after the current has stopped. It also takes some time for it to grow when the current starts. If the spins come from the current source then I would expect the magnetic field to be almost instantaneous (to us, not at the photon level). So maybe I just answered my own question!

To put that another way, the magnetic field is 90° out of phase with the voltage. That means that the voltage comes first and the magnetic field builds up after that voltage. This implies to me that the voltage, which is the photon current, induces the ambient field to spin in coherence with its own photons. This induction spreads from photon to photon, outwards from the center of the wire, and this takes time to happen.

More evidence is what is called back EMF. This happens when you send a current through a coil and when you turn that current off, a reversed current arises. This can cause all sorts of problems in electronics. If you use a relay in your circuit, which uses a coil to generate a magnetic field to move an armature to close a switch, they you have to deal with that back EMF or it might blow other components that can't handle a reversed current (such as transistors).

I'm glad you like Scarecrow. I thought you might. If anyone else enjoys a good action story, then I highly recommend Matthew Reilly's work. You've never heard a story with as much action and at such a fast pace as Reilly's work. If you have, then please let me know! I have heard that Michael Crichton's work is quite fast too, and he is an influence of Reilly's, but I haven't read any of his books, just watched the Jurassic Park movies.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:20 pm

.
Nevyn wrote. To put that another way, the magnetic field is 90° out of phase with the voltage. That means that the voltage comes first and the magnetic field builds up after that voltage. This implies to me that the voltage, which is the photon current, induces the ambient field to spin in coherence with its own photons. This induction spreads from photon to photon, outwards from the center of the wire, and this takes time to happen.

Spin is orthogonal to linear motion. When all spin directions agree, we say the field is magnetic. There is also a phase relationship between voltage and current which is the result of the proton matter making up the circuit; voltage leads current 90deg in inductive circuits, and current leads voltage 90deg in capacitive circuits. The slow buildup or drop in magnetism is due to increasing coherence or loss of that coherence in either the circuit or nearby paramagnetic material. That takes time. Coherent photons from the wire cannot magnetize ambient photons near the wire. Any ambient photons gaining spin from the wire are rebounding from the wire. Coherent emissions can only “magnetize” nearby atoms which in turn emit coherent photons which can increase the resulting overall magnetic field.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:07 pm

I'm still trying to figure out voltage and current using Miles' principles. I may be misinterpreting some things.

You're right about the phase diagrams too. I think they need more study to figure out how they relate to photon charge.

But I'm not sure why the charge photons through the wire can't induce spin in the ambient field around that wire. I don't think it should require atoms to magnetize, as that would mean that there would be no magnetic field (or a very, very reduced one) in space. I have no problem with atoms being magnetized by a charge field, but I don't think it is required for a magnetic field. Enhance it, for sure, but not required.

How about some of the charge photons in the wire move outside of it and they interact with the ambient field to induce spin, which goes on to interact with the ambient field further out, creating a magnetic field. The magnetic field has less strength the further from the wire because each interaction with the ambient field takes away energy so there is a little bit less energy transfer in each stage.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:23 am

.
Maxwell’s clockwork aether can induce spin in the ambient charge field near the wire. Photons can only interact in collisions. Ambient photons are passing at light speed, some of them collide with the wire, and fewer still collide with photons emitted by the wire. There will be little to no coherence between those photons.

When Miles talks about E/M, he is generally talking about the charge field properties displayed by small atoms, ions and electrons. We could not see the underlying charge field if not for their E/M effects. Likewise, current and voltage have specific definitions related to atom, ion and electron behavior which we now realize are due to the underlying charge field.

I might have a new thought here. If atoms can add to a magnetic field electrons might also. Electrons aren’t just pushed along slowly in the wire, electrons recycle photons. As voltage is increased, more electrons are available, increased electrons within the wire add directly to the wire’s overall emission. If all emissions were coherent, the magnetic field can expand along with additional electrons. I can also imagine increased internal electron emissions interfering with proton/proton bonds, increasing heat, and burning the wire open.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Fri Apr 07, 2017 4:45 am

You're right. The current can not induce spin in the ambient field. I spent some time thinking about how it could and my efforts fell flat. I was thinking about photons that were traveling in the same direction as the current, which would take the linear velocity out of the equation. There is no way for a spinning photon to collide side-to-side with another photon and make that photon spin the same way it does. It will always make it spin in the opposite way to itself. Therefore the magnetic field must be made of photons that come from the power source.

The higher the voltage, the denser the photon current, the more photons that can spill out to form the magnetic field. The magnetic field drops off because the photon density drops as it moves outwards from the wire. The magnetic field does affect the ambient field but this induces the opposite spin to itself which creates a boundary or layer. It is this ambient magnetism that causes the reverse current when the magnetic field stops. Maybe? Possibly?
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Fri Apr 07, 2017 2:26 pm

.
I like your field description, though I’m not sure I understand how photons "spill out" of the wire; are “spilled” photons any different from emitted photons?
 
Nevyn wrote. It is this ambient magnetism that causes the reverse current when the magnetic field stops. Maybe? Possibly?

If I understand correctly, ambient magnetism is a local charge field response to energizing a magnetic field. In an alternating circuit, the ambient field is continually energizing or de-energizing in response to the wire’s alternating magnetic field. There is a time lag involved. Ambient magnetism isn’t a problem when we are describing a wire in space, where the magnetic field may extend indefinitely, until the wire’s emission field is indistinguishable from the ambient field on our measuring device. Until total saturation of the wire is achieved, portions of the wire itself present a regular, counter, ambient magnetic field.

Ambient magnetism may be a problem when we talking about proton matter near the wire or in more complex circuits; involving interactions (intended or not) between circuit elements and adjacent matter in their energized (magnetized) and un-energized states. Many devices rely on such interactions, for example, I believe, opening and closing transistor gates.

Ambient magnetism can be a huge problem when we have proton matter motion in response to the creation of the magnetic field, as in say, motors. When the circuit is de-energised the motor is still in motion forcing a reverse energization of the otherwise de-energized circuit. I admit my thinking is a bit shaky here.

The wire (system) is subject to a changing equilibrium, there will always be resistance to changes, a delay before the end state is reached. Reverse surges will occur as the system tries to snap back from an energized to a de-energized state.

I’m giving a long winded answer, I think I agree with you.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Fri Apr 07, 2017 6:11 pm

Yes, there is a difference: their linear velocity. I'm not sure if spilled out is a good term to use, but I was trying to imply that they are the same type of photons as in the charge current in the wire. They travel in the same direction where-as emitted photons from the current would travel perpendicular to the current (ie from inside to outside).

What I like about the emitted version is that those emitted photons are moving outwards. That keeps the magnetic field from providing any forward velocity (the direction of the current). If they are part of the current, then they should provide some forward velocity as well as spin and I am unaware of the magnetic field providing any force other than the torque around the wire.

So right now I am stuck between these two models. I don't know which one to pick. Maybe I need to think about the atoms in the wire a bit more. I have been ignoring them and that may be a mistake. If the current travels through those atoms then some of it will be emitted out of their carousel levels. I've just realised that I had those atoms oriented incorrectly. They would be aligned with the current such that their north and south poles are in line with the photon traffic of that current. This leaves their carousel levels pointing outwards and as such, they can create the magnetic field with their emission. One thing to keep in mind with this view is that the spin of each photon does not change as it is emitted out of the carousel levels of these atoms. We need to keep them spinning about the same axis that the current is moving along in order to create a torque that curves around the wire.

I thought I had a simple scenario to model and now we've gone and complicated it again!

There's nothing wrong with long winded answers. But that's a medium winded answer, by my standards, so my statement probably doesn't mean much Very Happy.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LloydK on Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:59 pm

- Airman said: "3) Include an electron current."
But electron flow is said to be only a few millimeters per second in wire. Doesn't seem feasible to show such slow motion next to photon motion. Does it? Or do you mean electrons around the wire that manifest the magnetic field? I believe Miles said ion spins produce magnetism, but photon spins cause the ion spins. Right?

- Photons moving through wire probably travel slower than through glass, but photons surrounding the wire should travel at normal light speed. Seems to me that outer electrons might guide photons along the surface of a wire via through charge. But maybe the electrons hovering near the wire would do a better job. Would those electrons travel faster along the wire and guide the photon current too? I assume those free electrons would be spinning with spin axes parallel to the wire, so through charge would be feasible.

- By the way, I told Miles about the CNPS conference and he said he prefers to present his material on his website. And I mentioned that you guys are working on more simulations. He said to keep him posted on your results.

LloydK

Posts : 407
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:57 pm

.
I also imagine the Cu atoms’ N/S poles connected in columnar lines parallel to the wire. The carousals are locked in position with respect to adjacent Cu columns. Open carousal emissions on the wires’ surface would then tend to depart the wire along those channel lines outward, not radially, though still perpendicular to the wire and current directions.

There’s no magnetism in our wire, why not? The wire’s atomic configuration alone doesn’t emit a magnetic field. We have to turn on the current. Even a tiny amount of voltage is enough to cause a net charge field displacement and magnetic field.

I believe a net photon charge flow through the wire forces electrons within the wire to align their poles with the photon current flow. Unlike Cu atoms, the electrons are free to spin about the axis of current flow. Even a small voltage aligns electron emissions radially outward, like little protons, away from the wire.

Nevyn, have you ever thought about or modeled electron emissions?

Lloyd, I've just convinced myself aligning electrons within the wire causes the magnetic field; increasing the number of electrons will increase the magnetic field and yes they travel slowly. Miles hasn't described this sort of electron behavior, I may need you to talk me down.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Sat Apr 08, 2017 12:46 am

I had a similar view to the atom configuration in the wire, or any solid. Atoms connected at all 6 locations. But I am now thinking that there is more wiggle room. Miles often mentions the atoms rotating to bring themselves inline with the most focused field that they are experiencing. Can we rule out solids from this rule? How about liquids? It is easy to see that a gas can do so, because all atoms are free or paired up, etc. Liquids are closer bonds but still not enough to form a solid. Are liquids sheets of atoms? Only 2D bonds in a solid like connection but the other dimension is free to move? Or it could be strings instead. 1D bonds at the north and south locations creating long strings of atoms.

I am now thinking that these bonds are not as close as I once thought. The atoms may not even overlap at all. This would allow each atom to reorient itself to the local field. Even in a solid. If this is possible, then the carousel level of each atom will be perpendicular to the current flow and may even be able to spin since the photon current is enough to keep the structure intact and the carousel connections are not as required as they would be without that strong current.

Or it could even be a mixture of the two. When in a normal state, the wire atoms bond at all 6 locations, but when the current is flowing through it, then they move apart a bit and can reorient themselves and adjust the current flow through themselves. That current has to affect the atoms and it does so by making them stronger. They contains more charge than normal. This may be enough to move the bonds apart a bit.

Even if that is not how it happens, it would make a cool animation!

While I haven't modeled electrons specifically, the conceptual proton viewer on my site is the same thing. It is really a charged particle viewer and I might rename it to represent that.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Sat Apr 08, 2017 12:59 am

One thing I have come to appreciate from this discussion is that there are many different forms of magnetism. They all come down to photon spin and this can be said to be magnetism or the cause of magnetism, but we have to recognize the different ways that those photons can be delivered to appreciate the many different ways that magnetism operates.

Atoms do not cause magnetism, but they do create the channels for photons to flow and the spins of those photons will cause forces on whatever they collide with. Why do only some things react to those forces? It might be related to how coherent their charge fields are. If the object has a more random charge profile, then it might not react to magnetism as much because it scrambles the coherence of that magnetism. Some objects may allow the magnetic photons to flow through themselves and this is how the magnetism affects them. Not as a surface interaction but deep down in the structure as well. I don't know. Keep the ideas coming!
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LloydK on Sat Apr 08, 2017 1:28 pm

Are copper wire atoms aligned?
I don't think so, since I once saw a micrograph or something image of copper wire, and it looked like squarish plates randomly thrown together. Iron atoms are not aligned in a bar, but an electric current coiled around the bar at least partly aligns and magnetizes them. Copper isn't magnetic, though, is it? One website I think says there are 10^24 free electrons per meter of copper wire, but I didn't check the thickness. That's 10^21 per mm. That's a lot of free electrons.

Here are copper and carbon images from MM:



I included the carbon in case it may be easier to simulate carbon wire. I think it's both magnetic and conducting of electricity. It has no carousel.

Aligned Electrons
A: "a net photon charge flow through the wire forces electrons within the wire to align their poles with the photon current flow. Unlike Cu atoms, the electrons are free to spin about the axis of current flow. Even a small voltage aligns electron emissions radially outward, like little protons, away from the wire."
L: That (electron alignment) seems more likely, than that copper atoms align, but the electron axes should align parallel to the wire, not perpendicular, it seems to me. It's only the free electrons hovering near the wire that produce the magnetic field around the wire. Isn't it? And can't they be aligned by being hit by photons from the electrons in and esp. at the surface of the wire, because the electron charge streams likely fan out a little? I imagine those free electrons would also be carried along somewhat on the photon current. What may you need to be talked down from? And do you mean talked down logically or loudly?

N: Miles often mentions the atoms rotating to bring themselves inline with the most focused field that they are experiencing.
L: Now you need to simulate atoms in a solid wire aligning. If they can align, it doesn't seem like they'd be very solid. Alignment of the electrons seems easier to accomplish. Same for magnetized iron.

N: They all come down to photon spin and this can be said to be magnetism or the cause of magnetism
L: It may be a challenge to show the antiphoton spins along with the others. According to Miles, if we were on Mars or Titan, photon and antiphoton numbers are supposed to be more equalized. Aren't they? So would magnetism be harder to accomplish there? How do the large planets maintain magnetic fields?

LloydK

Posts : 407
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by LongtimeAirman on Sat Apr 08, 2017 5:13 pm

.
I assume most or all atoms in a solid are locked into one of any number of fixed structures, indicative of the forms and energies necessary to create the structure in the first place. I find it hard to believe attaching a 2V battery and wires to a Cu busbar are going to reorient any atoms in the busbar; primarily because atoms aren’t spherical. The atomic N/S lines, or lattice dimensions, are longest and strongest, the atoms would need to reorient and shift their positions to go from carousal emission charge channel separation distances to main axis charge channel separations and back again, the atomic lattice would seem to need to move like an accordion, baffling one way or another in response to current flow direction changes. If atoms were relatively further apart, with longer channel distances, the same logic applies, the atoms cannot simply reorient as a sphere, they must also shift position.

I might add, at this point, we should be able to lock down the dimensions of an alpha, as well as the relative distances between atoms.


Nevyn wrote. Miles often mentions the atoms rotating to bring themselves inline with the most focused field that they are experiencing. Can we rule out solids from this rule?
Airman. Affirmative, I agree. Aside from special cases and higher energies, atomic shifts cannot occur in a solid. Within solids, photonic currents will be accommodated primarily by the existing solid’s atomic structure.

Atomic shifts definitely occur in gasses. One dimensional atomic chains of N/S connections allow free spinning about the N/S axis. Two dimensional water needs its own discussion. Questions abound, so many possibilities for atomic reorienting, shifting, recombining or otherwise reacting to photonic charge direction changes.

Free electrons within a Cu busbar might react to a voltage differential as a fluid or gas, it’s extremely easy to see how even just 2V may reorient and send them all in their slow motion drift in the resulting photonic current. We can increase the magnetic field by simply increasing voltage. I’m becoming more convinced the magnetic field about a wire is due strictly to electron emissions.


Lloyd wrote. Are copper wire atoms aligned? I don't think so, …
Airman. I agree, Cu atoms within wires could not align so simply; for sake of discussion, assume a perfect form, a line of atoms (a subject which needs its own discussion). In reality, conductors have molecular structures which in no way suggest such perfect forms exist. Further, their molecular structures do not change, even after many years of service.

Lloyd wrote. I included the carbon in case it may be easier to simulate carbon wire. I think it's both magnetic and conducting of electricity. It has no carousel.
Airman. Carbon is a much simpler conductor, I had no idea carbon was magnetic. I need to read up on the subject.  

Lloyd wrote. Aligned Electrons
A: "a net photon charge flow through the wire forces electrons within the wire to align their poles with the photon current flow. Unlike Cu atoms, the electrons are free to spin about the axis of current flow. Even a small voltage aligns electron emissions radially outward, like little protons, away from the wire."
L: That (electron alignment) seems more likely, than that copper atoms align, but the electron axes should align parallel to the wire, not perpendicular, it seems to me.
Airman. I agree, I thought that's what I was describing. The electron axis is aligned parallel to the wire, exposing the electron pole to the direct photon current, that electron orientation results in an emission plane where photons travel radially outward from the wire.  

L2: It's only the free electrons hovering near the wire that produce the magnetic field around the wire. Isn't it?
Airman. Disagree. Electron emissions are photons, generally unhindered by the wire and so photon emissions emerge from free electrons distributed throughout the wire's volume. It’s not yet established that electrons cause the magnetic field. The discussion isn’t over and you're making a case too. I hope you’re not thinking about high frequency skin effects.

L3: And can't they be aligned by being hit by photons from the electrons in and esp. at the surface of the wire, because the electron charge streams likely fan out a little? I imagine those free electrons would also be carried along somewhat on the photon current.
Airman. I Like the idea of electrons outside the bar, in effect expanding the bar’s capacity. The idea of local spilled photons might be perfectly explained with electrons – can electrons spill out of the wire? Sure they can. Free electrons outside the wire add to the mix.

L4:What may you need to be talked down from? And do you mean talked down logically or loudly?
Airman. Thank you, you did good.
.

LongtimeAirman
Admin

Posts : 592
Join date : 2014-08-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ideas for Applications and Animations

Post by Nevyn on Sat Apr 08, 2017 6:58 pm

There is plenty to think about here and I am still doing so, but I wanted to say that I am in total agreement with electron poles aligning to the current and this causing their emission to move outwards from the center of the wire. This could be enough to create the magnetic field, but it does seem a little weak to me. I am still trying to get those atoms involved. I am not totally convinced that they can't reorient themselves based on the applied current.

Airman, you mentioned atoms not being perfect spheres and that is true, but I'm not so sure it matters too much. It really matters if you assume that atoms bond by overlapping their hook stacks, but not a big deal if they bond with some distance between them. It only means that the carousel bonds are a bit further apart than the north/south bonds. Thus allowing the whole atom to move within its little compartment in the structure. Nothing is as solid as it appears to us at our scale.

I might need to re-read a few papers to refresh my memory on some of these concepts. There might be some things that we are missing.

At this point in time, I put Airman's theory in front. Maybe it's Scarecrow's influence (just finished the second book), but I'm not giving up on my mission just yet.
avatar
Nevyn
Admin

Posts : 795
Join date : 2014-09-11

View user profile http://www.nevyns-lab.com

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum