Tesla was a great inventor who had opinions on a great many things. Past blog posts, of this blog, have showed some similarity to Tesla's work.
Tesla believed that gravity with an equal and opposite reaction to light escaping from the Earth. This blog thought that radiation was more in the way of Beta particles due to interactions due to the geometry of the mass.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Both Tesla and this blog agree on that. This blog thinks that electrons and their charge pressure present a constant mass propagating away from the center of mass. Tesla indicated that it was light that posed the equal and opposite reaction to gravity.
Friday 26 May 2017
Wednesday 24 May 2017
The Skin Effect
As current makes it's way down a wire we know there are collisions and parasitic effects. The parasitic effects are defined by the telegrapher's model. When considering the skin effect one has to look at the series inductance in the telegrapher's model. Electrons undergoing conduction are going to find themselves in the middle of the conductor, at the periphery of the conductor or somewhere in-between.
Electrons will push outwards from the center of the conductor and they spin. The spin of electrons creates the 'magnetic' field outside the wire. The same effect goes on inside the wire creating tight spins of electrons.
Lenz's law deals with the conservation of angular momentum as tight spinning electrons cause a bigger more broad current eddy in the surrounding conductor. These eddy currents set up in a current carrying conductor.
The eddy currents set up within a cylindrical shaped conductor. The eddy currents push downwards and backwards counter to the main conducting current. The eddy currents add up to oppose the main conducting current.
Eddy currents are only an issue for alternating current. As the frequency of the alternating current rises so too do the skin effects. The skin depth of alternating current on a conductor decreases as conducting current frequency increases.
Electrons will push outwards from the center of the conductor and they spin. The spin of electrons creates the 'magnetic' field outside the wire. The same effect goes on inside the wire creating tight spins of electrons.
Lenz's law deals with the conservation of angular momentum as tight spinning electrons cause a bigger more broad current eddy in the surrounding conductor. These eddy currents set up in a current carrying conductor.
The eddy currents set up within a cylindrical shaped conductor. The eddy currents push downwards and backwards counter to the main conducting current. The eddy currents add up to oppose the main conducting current.
Eddy currents are only an issue for alternating current. As the frequency of the alternating current rises so too do the skin effects. The skin depth of alternating current on a conductor decreases as conducting current frequency increases.
Sunday 14 May 2017
Electromagnetic-Chemistry
This is a look at what might be going on at the atomic level of an atom from an electromagnetic vantage point. I haven't chosen any atom in particular to look at. I just want to look at the structure of the periodic table as it relates to some very basic and theoretical electromagnetic theory that goes well beyond the writings of J. Maxwell or O. Heaviside.
It is first interesting to consider the Q-factor for an atom. Q is energy stored divided by energy dissipated. This is usually easiest to measure within the context of one cycle or orbit. Q, for an atom, looks to be nearly infinite as the electrons orbiting an atom don't seem to lose significant amounts of kinetic or photonic energy. We know that electrons dissipate energy through a dissipation of photons or through transmitting energy to the nucleus synthesizing heat.
The statistical distributions and rate parameters of an atom exchanging electrons with other atoms or the vacuum of space don't seem to be well known. One way or another there must be a method of modeling electrons colliding with other matter vs an electron moving away to another atom. In a given atom (any element) with a given number of covalent, ionic or Van Der Walls type bonds, an electron, will leave the atom at a particular rate. This rate is conveniently modeled in statistics using the related Poisson and exponential distributions. The electron departing the atom may be involved in a bond or it may just be a statistical departure due to a collision or charge related effects.
It is best to use the exponential and Poisson distributions to characterize the random departure of electrons from the vicinity of a nucleus. There doesn't seem to be good data sets to try to develop rate or shape parameters for exponential or related distributions. What we can infer from what we know about atoms is that the electrons move at speeds that can only be characterized through relativity. At these speeds the electron appears to be in more than one place or to have more than the mass of one electron.
From the periodic table we can try and lay out the shape of an ideal stable atom. This is a misnomer as the electrons are traveling very fast and the configuration of an atom will be in constant flux. When looking at the atom we must switch our thinking from the flux of field theory to the discrete nature of natural numbers where there is a discrete number of electrons, protons and neutrons.
Conventionally we have to understand that the elements we observe near a large mass are under a high amount of 'pressure'. A large amount of pressure translates to a lot of electrons that are exchanged between a great number of atoms. In the upper atmosphere there is a lot of plasma interacting with a lot of particle rays from the sun (alpha, beta, gamma et al.). The pressure of a large mass with significant gravity shows atoms in a different manner than the atoms we find in the vacuum of outer space which take the form of plasma rather than the well formed atoms on larger forms of mass and in the periodic table of the elements.
So how do we visualize an atom from any column of the periodic table of the elements. I spend my time looking at columns III, IV and V of the table but any column or row is worth thinking about. Electrical engineers are often concerned with semiconductors, conductors and dielectrics.
Octahedrons are the best shape to consider when envisioning the periodic table and its elements. Octahedrons involve a lot of triangles. Eight to be exact. Octaherons have three squares, for example, one for each dimension in space. Civil engineers love triangles because trusses tend not to collapse when a truss is involved. Octahedrons also stack well so that they can be combined to form a lattice. The Octahedron has eight faces as the periodic table has eight columns and models of electrons have eight statistical positions.
Cubes have eight points allowing that form to show some usefulness whilst considering the periodic table. The trouble is that the cube is made of all square faces and without the triangles a civil engineer likes so much.
Electrons move fast and constantly. There is no reason to believe that electrons always move at speeds less than light speed. When electrons move this fast around a much more massive nucleus we can expect some interesting effects. The spin of both the electron and nucleus will mean that most collisions between the electron and her nucleus will result in a bounce and not a new neutron. This is similar to the effect of a top bouncing off an object as in collides with great spin. Also, the high speeds of the electron mean that the very shape of the atom will be low pass filtered. Rather that a perfect octaheron or cube we end up with a sphere shaped atom if we could look at any type of time lapsed photograph of this particle.
I'll circle back now to the Q factor as it relates to one or more atoms. Single atoms seem to have an extremely high Q factor due to the fact that they don't seem to dissipate energy over short periods of time. Putting ten to the power of forty atoms in close proximity adds a low pass filter effect to the Q factor of the new system. Energy stored vs. energy dissipated goes down greatly because of the energy stored in the form of capacitance and inductance and the energy dissipated rises due to interactions between the electrons and the lattice or nuclear complex. It is important to consider the transmission line equations as they relate to large masses. The transmission line equations as they relate to large masses displaying obvious gravity may be the subject of a future blog post.
It is first interesting to consider the Q-factor for an atom. Q is energy stored divided by energy dissipated. This is usually easiest to measure within the context of one cycle or orbit. Q, for an atom, looks to be nearly infinite as the electrons orbiting an atom don't seem to lose significant amounts of kinetic or photonic energy. We know that electrons dissipate energy through a dissipation of photons or through transmitting energy to the nucleus synthesizing heat.
The statistical distributions and rate parameters of an atom exchanging electrons with other atoms or the vacuum of space don't seem to be well known. One way or another there must be a method of modeling electrons colliding with other matter vs an electron moving away to another atom. In a given atom (any element) with a given number of covalent, ionic or Van Der Walls type bonds, an electron, will leave the atom at a particular rate. This rate is conveniently modeled in statistics using the related Poisson and exponential distributions. The electron departing the atom may be involved in a bond or it may just be a statistical departure due to a collision or charge related effects.
It is best to use the exponential and Poisson distributions to characterize the random departure of electrons from the vicinity of a nucleus. There doesn't seem to be good data sets to try to develop rate or shape parameters for exponential or related distributions. What we can infer from what we know about atoms is that the electrons move at speeds that can only be characterized through relativity. At these speeds the electron appears to be in more than one place or to have more than the mass of one electron.
From the periodic table we can try and lay out the shape of an ideal stable atom. This is a misnomer as the electrons are traveling very fast and the configuration of an atom will be in constant flux. When looking at the atom we must switch our thinking from the flux of field theory to the discrete nature of natural numbers where there is a discrete number of electrons, protons and neutrons.
Conventionally we have to understand that the elements we observe near a large mass are under a high amount of 'pressure'. A large amount of pressure translates to a lot of electrons that are exchanged between a great number of atoms. In the upper atmosphere there is a lot of plasma interacting with a lot of particle rays from the sun (alpha, beta, gamma et al.). The pressure of a large mass with significant gravity shows atoms in a different manner than the atoms we find in the vacuum of outer space which take the form of plasma rather than the well formed atoms on larger forms of mass and in the periodic table of the elements.
So how do we visualize an atom from any column of the periodic table of the elements. I spend my time looking at columns III, IV and V of the table but any column or row is worth thinking about. Electrical engineers are often concerned with semiconductors, conductors and dielectrics.
Octahedrons are the best shape to consider when envisioning the periodic table and its elements. Octahedrons involve a lot of triangles. Eight to be exact. Octaherons have three squares, for example, one for each dimension in space. Civil engineers love triangles because trusses tend not to collapse when a truss is involved. Octahedrons also stack well so that they can be combined to form a lattice. The Octahedron has eight faces as the periodic table has eight columns and models of electrons have eight statistical positions.
Cubes have eight points allowing that form to show some usefulness whilst considering the periodic table. The trouble is that the cube is made of all square faces and without the triangles a civil engineer likes so much.
Electrons move fast and constantly. There is no reason to believe that electrons always move at speeds less than light speed. When electrons move this fast around a much more massive nucleus we can expect some interesting effects. The spin of both the electron and nucleus will mean that most collisions between the electron and her nucleus will result in a bounce and not a new neutron. This is similar to the effect of a top bouncing off an object as in collides with great spin. Also, the high speeds of the electron mean that the very shape of the atom will be low pass filtered. Rather that a perfect octaheron or cube we end up with a sphere shaped atom if we could look at any type of time lapsed photograph of this particle.
I'll circle back now to the Q factor as it relates to one or more atoms. Single atoms seem to have an extremely high Q factor due to the fact that they don't seem to dissipate energy over short periods of time. Putting ten to the power of forty atoms in close proximity adds a low pass filter effect to the Q factor of the new system. Energy stored vs. energy dissipated goes down greatly because of the energy stored in the form of capacitance and inductance and the energy dissipated rises due to interactions between the electrons and the lattice or nuclear complex. It is important to consider the transmission line equations as they relate to large masses. The transmission line equations as they relate to large masses displaying obvious gravity may be the subject of a future blog post.
Thursday 11 May 2017
Hypothesis on Electromagnetics
Electromagnetics has long been an area where Maxwell's equations have broken down into a set of differential equations describing a wave. Since the Michelson–Morley experiment was performed it has been assumed that an electromagnetic wave propagated without a medium. Previous to the Michelson-Morley experiment there had been an assumption that Ether was the medium electromagnetic energy propagated in.
I would hypothesize that perhaps our medium for electromagnetic power - Ether - is lumpy. So lumpy is the Ether that it may be looked at as electrons, Beta particles or even photons. Electrons jump massive distances in very short periods of time as they travel at a real fraction of the speed of light. Secondly, Diract determined that the electron had a certain duality to it. Perhaps the electron can be seen to be in multiple different places. Due to their incalculable speed, electrons almost appear to be in two places at once yet they may exist only at one point in space.
Electron characteristics might lead one to believe that electrons normally constitute both the signal and the medium for most electromagnetic wave propagation.
It may be required that protons and neutrons are required to produce a plausible medium for the propagation of any significant amount of electromagnetic power. Without a dense medium the power will disperse.
Also note that to receive any signal, current technology requires protons and neutrons to detect a power level derived from photons or, more likely, electrons.
It may be possible that if electrons and photons do not make up a suitable medium for a complete theory then it is at least a good place to start figuring out practical applications for a lumpy or discrete medium. Protons, neutrons and more exotic particles can be factored in later. Getting into drift velocity while at the same time contemplating near light-speed electromagnetic wave propagation seems like a disjointed fact set.
I'm sorry that I'm rambling now. The electron has been shown to show up in aprox. two places at once (Dieract). It makes more sense to me that the electron only measures to be in two places at one as an average in the present. In reality the electron can look to be in infinite places or in the ultimate reality of t+1 the electron is in one place. I'll either post more on this later or erase this text if I feel this is a dumb theory later.
I would hypothesize that perhaps our medium for electromagnetic power - Ether - is lumpy. So lumpy is the Ether that it may be looked at as electrons, Beta particles or even photons. Electrons jump massive distances in very short periods of time as they travel at a real fraction of the speed of light. Secondly, Diract determined that the electron had a certain duality to it. Perhaps the electron can be seen to be in multiple different places. Due to their incalculable speed, electrons almost appear to be in two places at once yet they may exist only at one point in space.
Electron characteristics might lead one to believe that electrons normally constitute both the signal and the medium for most electromagnetic wave propagation.
It may be required that protons and neutrons are required to produce a plausible medium for the propagation of any significant amount of electromagnetic power. Without a dense medium the power will disperse.
Also note that to receive any signal, current technology requires protons and neutrons to detect a power level derived from photons or, more likely, electrons.
It may be possible that if electrons and photons do not make up a suitable medium for a complete theory then it is at least a good place to start figuring out practical applications for a lumpy or discrete medium. Protons, neutrons and more exotic particles can be factored in later. Getting into drift velocity while at the same time contemplating near light-speed electromagnetic wave propagation seems like a disjointed fact set.
I'm sorry that I'm rambling now. The electron has been shown to show up in aprox. two places at once (Dieract). It makes more sense to me that the electron only measures to be in two places at one as an average in the present. In reality the electron can look to be in infinite places or in the ultimate reality of t+1 the electron is in one place. I'll either post more on this later or erase this text if I feel this is a dumb theory later.
Tuesday 9 May 2017
Archimedes' Principle and Gravity
This blog has represented gravity as a type of electron buoyancy. Of course the effect of all of the electrons on the nucleus-es is considered. Assuming Archimedes' principle to be formulated as Wikipedia has as follows: observed weight = mass - displaced mass.
Is it possible to develop a similar relationship for the gravitational relationship between large mass and the electrons escaping a mass the size of a planet. There is a propensity for electrons to escape the center of mass due to the excess negative charge found there in any mass. Permeating the mass is the propensity for negative charge to want to move out from the center of mass. Charge balance brings electrons and with it mass back towards the center of mass in what we call gravity.
Observed weight = pressure due to charge balance return to the center of mass - pressure of electrons moving towards the periphery of mass. There are differences between gravity and Archimedes' buoyancy however they are analogous. Buoyancy involves atoms of different sizes displacing each other while gravity involves different parts of the atomic structure displacing each other to cause movement of a mass.
Is it possible to develop a similar relationship for the gravitational relationship between large mass and the electrons escaping a mass the size of a planet. There is a propensity for electrons to escape the center of mass due to the excess negative charge found there in any mass. Permeating the mass is the propensity for negative charge to want to move out from the center of mass. Charge balance brings electrons and with it mass back towards the center of mass in what we call gravity.
Observed weight = pressure due to charge balance return to the center of mass - pressure of electrons moving towards the periphery of mass. There are differences between gravity and Archimedes' buoyancy however they are analogous. Buoyancy involves atoms of different sizes displacing each other while gravity involves different parts of the atomic structure displacing each other to cause movement of a mass.
Tuesday 2 May 2017
Electron Statics and Gravity
Electrostatics-wise, gravity can be seen in figure 1 as more proximate negative charges towards the center of a mass. The small and fast charges will accelerate from the center of mass to the periphery of the mass with a mean drift velocity as in any electric circuit. Electrons will jump like a grasshopper towards the periphery of the mass. Figure 1 makes sense if you imagine more mass with the center of mass at the focus of the diagram. Figure 1 is meant to illustrate the crowding of the innermost electrons juxtaposed against the sparse peripheral electrons in any mass.
Due to the charge balance theorem for every electron that accelerates towards the periphery of the mass there will be an electron or ion that take its place. There is an illustration of the effect in figure 2.
The gravitational effect comes from all of the ions that get pulled inwards to counter the electrons moving outwards at a fraction of the speed of light.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)