Magnetic field lines can be mapped using a compass. Iron-filings act like miniature compass needles when sprinkled on paper covering a magnet. Friction between the paper and an iron-filing ensures the iron-filing will pivot like a compass needle. In zero-g the iron-filings would need to be placed in a viscous suspension. Harry
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:26 PM, MarkI-Zeropoint <[email protected]>wrote: > U R welcome, ChemE! > > Does anyone know if the astronauts have ever done the magnet and > iron-filings kind of thing while in zero-g??? > > Anyone know of such an experiment done in a vacuum in 1g??? > > Is my assumption valid that the mag-field lines would still be obvious... > i.e., that this is possibly a physical manifestation of the polarization of > the vacuum... > > -mi > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:07 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > > Mark, > > That was a good paper, thanks for posting > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 2:04 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint < *[email protected]*> > wrote: > You might look at this paper as well; I’ve mentioned it many moons > ago. > > Polarizable vacuum analysis of electric and magnetic fields, Xing-Hao Ye > *http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2* > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2><http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > Abstract <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > The electric and magnetic fields are investigated on the basis of quantum > vacuum. The analysis of the electromagnetic energy and force indicates that > an electric field is a polarized distribution of the vacuum virtual > dipoles, and that a magnetic field in vacuum is a rearrangement of the > vacuum polarization. It means that an electromagnetic wave is a > successional changing of the vacuum polarization in space. Also, it is > found that the average half length of the virtual dipoles around an > elementary charge is a=2.8 *10^(-15)m. The result leads to the step > distribution of the field energy around an electron, the relation between > the fine structure constant and the vacuum polarization distribution, and > an extremely high energy density of the electromagnetic field. > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > Finally, <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > Anyone who has seen the mag-field-lines in iron filings has to at least > wonder if this is an obvious manifestation of the polarization discussed in > the above paper… ‘Fields’ are not just convenient > mathematical constructs, but a real physical phenomenon which directly > influences matter. The scientist in me then wonders if the iron filings > are following a polarization of atoms in the air??? But I would bet that > you would see the same thing if done in a vacuum… > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > -Mark Iverson <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > <http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.1305v2> > *From: *John Berry [mailto: *[email protected]*] > *Sent: *Sunday, March 16, 2014 1:02 AM > *To: **[email protected]* > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Electromagnetic inertia > > Yes, when beliefs are challenged, most scientists end up acting more like > religious types. > > To explain my idea most simply, it is magnetic hysteresis like drag of > space due to the speed of light limit. > > Only it requires acceleration. > > Secondly I have found scientific papers claim that the near-field around a > dipole transmits instantaneously within the quarter wave length. > > I can find it if anyone is interested. > > John > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 7:51 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint < *[email protected]*> > wrote: > I don’t know if your EM inertia is the same thing, but I mentioned > previously that the concept of inertia being a kind of electromagnetic > ‘drag’ between accelerated matter and the vacuum of space was > first derived/proposed by Haisch/Rueda many years ago… I’ve > visited Dr. Rueda several times at his office, Cal State Long Beach, which > is where I did my undergrad work… > Their first paper on this topic was: > B. Haisch, A. Rueda and H.E. Puthoff, Phys. Rev A 48 (1994) 678 > It derived the formula for inertia, F=ma, from the zero-point field; F=ma > was a fundamental equation not thought to be derivable. Comments from the > peer-reviewers went something like this: > “Well, I can’t find any errors in your math, and the physics > looks good… but it just can’t be.” > Gee, that sure sounds like a scientist talking… NOT! > It was Bernie Haisch’s concept, but Dr. Rueda did all the > math… and take a look at the 1994 paper and you’ll get some > idea of just what kind of mathematician Rueda is… it’s like > 40+ pages of mostly equations. Anyway, here’s a reference for a > followup paper they did in 2005: > > Gravity and the Quantum Vacuum Inertia Hypothesis > Alfonso Rueda, Bernard Haisch > (Submitted on 13 Apr 2005 (v1), last revised 15 Apr 2005 (this version, > v3)) > > *http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3*<http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3><http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3> > This caught my eye when scanning the conclusions: > <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3> > “(7) An experimental prediction has been made that the mass of the > resonant electromagnetic zero-point field modes within a cavity should add > to the mass of the cavity structure.” > <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3> > -Mark Iverson <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504061v3> > *From: **[email protected]*[mailto: *[email protected]*] > *Sent: *Friday, March 14, 2014 7:44 PM > *To: **[email protected]* > > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Electromagnetic inertia > I looked at this and came up with the source of electromagnetic inertia is > the acceleration of an energy flow. > *http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html*<http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html><http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html> > <http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html> > >
