The motion is powered by the applied current, explained in the synopsis.
Ie. input energy is converting to work. The anisotropy is a material,
structural or reactive property, not a fundamental field property.
Obviously there is chiralty and 'handedness' in nature, but what i was
attempting to address was an overly-simplistic interpretation of Tesla's
"wheelworks" quip - as if a straightforward mechanical, gearwise coupling
between quantum and classical angular momenta might be possible.
In every case where something spins up, something else is providing field
density or direction fluctuations that are resolving to torque, but while
it costs no energy, in principle, to vary a field property, if that
variation in turn performs mechanical work, then that workload is commuted
back to the energy source - in other words, Mr Hand is burning more burrito
when waving a stator ring over a spinning rotor, than he would without the
rotor present, and the same is true in any EM or electrical example, the
counter-forces,and thus output workload, commuted to the input source via
A rise in momentum and / or energy without a corresponding loading on the
input energy supply would of course be a genuinely interesting system..
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:35 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> V! sez:
> - I'm familiar with the producers of the above videos. In every
> instance of these angular accelerations, they are being produced by the
> linear accelerations of Mr Hand, either waving a stator ring or poking a
> magnet at a field etc..
> Perhaps not. There is both a logical explanation for spontaneous rotation
> (in *Nature*, no less) - and several vids with no Mr. Hand…
> “The origin of this anisotropy is purely electronic—the so-called
> electronic nematicity. Unusually, the nematic director is not aligned with
> the crystal axes, unless a substantial orthorhombic distortion is imposed.
> The fact that this anisotropy occurs in a material that exhibits
> high-temperature superconductivity may not be a coincidence.”