> Where did this [kinetic energy] come from? Simply the energy you put into the > loop to > establish the magnetic field.
I don't know, do we have to put energy into a positive charge so that it gets attracted to a negative charge? (we must not forget that the magnetic force from a moving charged particle is purely electric in that particle's rest frame) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics > The magnet moving towards the loop will induce the opposite voltage in the > loop, as .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 volts > induced in the opposite direction is enough to reverse the current direction > in the SC loop the magnet will basically not be attracted at all. > Except of course for the fact that this would collapse the magnetic field of > the loop, so this helps keep the current flowing. > > So what will occur is a hand off, the voltage induced by the magnet will be > equal to the voltage induced by the collapsing magnetic field, so the > magnetic field is slowly collapsed, there is no more current in the loop and > the magnet has gained KE. > > Where did this come from? Simply the energy you put into the loop to > establish the magnetic field. (It might be a superconductor so it takes no > energy to maintain a magnetic field but it does take energy to establish > one) > > In this case energy is conserved, and energy is always conserved unless you > use the aether, space time to change the rules. > > > On 1/29/07, Michel Jullian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Your new experiment (attraction rather than alignment) simplifies things >> somehow (no torque, just linear acceleration), but let's stick to the >> non-wire-resistive loop shall we, it makes things simpler, and closer to the >> electron orbit or spin counterpart you are comparing it to. >> >> 1/ Using an external current source, let's start a constant current >> through the loop. >> >> 2/ Zero wire resistance, zero radiation resistance, constant current so >> zero auto-induced voltage -L*di/dt, so zero voltage drop. This means we can >> connect the loop back on itself and remove the current source without >> stopping the current ok? Let's do that, so that loop voltage will remain >> zero for ever, and define this as time zero for the energy balance. >> >> 3/ Now let's release the magnet. It should indeed be attracted and >> accelerated towards the short-circuited current loop so KE will be gained, >> but how could the energy be drawn from the loop if voltage is zero? >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:16 AM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Energy *Violations* using *standard* physics >> >> >> > Michel Jullian wrote: >> > > I agree with all the interesting comments below, >> > both Stephen's and yours, relative to >> > the unavoidable antenna aspect of a coil, which makes >> > it non purely inductive to some >> > extent when current varies with time. >> > > >> > > However, may I remind you that my initial >> > statement, which you deemed 100% incorrect, >> > simply said that "keeping the current going" in an >> > isolated non-resistive current loop >> > would not consume energy. >> > > In which case i is constant in time, so the >> > frequency f of the signal is zero, so the >> > wavelength lambda = c/f is infinite, so the radiation >> > resistance: >> > > >> > > Rr= 31171 * A^2/lambda^2 (with A the area of the >> > circular loop) is zero. >> > > >> > > So the power Rr*i^2 consumed in Rr is zero too. >> > This still doesn't make my loop consume >> > energy. >> > >> > >> > >> > Your Quote, >> > --- >> > "You keep telling us electromagnets consume energy, >> > true but that's only because the wires >> > are resistive. A non-resistive current-loop would not >> > consume any energy to keep the >> > current going." >> > --- >> > >> > >> > LOL ... this is hopeless. Again --> You state the >> > only consumed energy in an >> > electro-magnetic is because the wires are resistive. >> > Besides the fact you missed other >> > factors such as radiation resistance lets focus on the >> > fact that a magnet attracted and >> > accelerating toward the wire resistive current loop >> > would *indeed* induce an opposing >> > voltage, which would consume energy. The gained KE >> > comes from the wire resistive current loop. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > Paul Lowrance >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________________________________ >> > Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. >> > Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta. >> > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html >> > >> >> >
