Re: Magnetism vs Electricity
- View Source--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "xingu1306" <xingu1306@...> wrote:
>No, because magnetism IS well understood we know that it is a poor
> We all know by now as a fact, that magnetism is needed, one way or
> another, to produce electricity. If not in the use of physical
> magnets as in AC and DC then in atomic particle magnets inside the
> current. About voltages and currents we already know a lot,
> otherwise we were not capable of making such ingenious devices we
> have right now.
> Yet, magnetism is poorly understood, no matter what Quantum
> Mechanics tells us, otherwise we probably should have had devices
> working on magnetism like the ones we already have on electricity.
analogy. Magnetism is a pseudo force caused by different charge
densities, often caused by Relativistic shifts due to charge carrier
> My suggestion would than be: approach magnetism as we did withIf this were possible? That's the point -- it's not. You should take
> electricity. Let us try to make equivalents for resistors
> (shielding), capacitators (temporary varying strength storage one
> way magnets), diodes (one way magnets) and so on. (Let's make things
> better, sounds familiar?). If this were possible, I'm sure we could
> have major breakthroughs in various fields of research.
some time to learn about physics as it was figured out in the last
century. Magnetism is NOT all that complicated, it's just confusing
unless you understand the nuances of Relativity.
> I think it would already be a big breakthrough when we were toThat "unidentified force" is electrostatic interaction (attraction and
> succeed in the simple on and off switching of a magnet, without the
> aid of electricity, without repositioning it and without loosing the
> yet unidentified force within a magnet.
repulsion). Nothing myserious, and unless you know of an energy free
way to move oribitals and spin properties of charge carriers you can't
build your energy free magnet switch.
> So I am very curious if somebody could tell, if there are alreadyRead and learn:
> devices doing what is described.
- View SourceThe human condition is just one more thing that McCutcheon is clueless
about. And when someone makes subjective comparisons when trying to
make a point I suspect that person is selling snake oil.
Science is a continuous learning process; why just the other day it
was brought to my attention that I have been tying my shoe laces
incorrectly for the last 55 years, see; you're never too old to learn.
--- In email@example.com, "Tom Schum" <thomasjschum@...>
> So, I bought the book from Amazon, and it arrived yesterday.
> I spent the evening slowly reading the first chapter (the one you
> download for free).isn't
> McCutcheon knows why hardcore skeptics are the way they are, and
> describes that clearly in the first chapter (profoundly so). It
> their fault, it is the training they have received that has notgiven
> them the tools to think beyond the intrinsic limits of that training.