Electromagnetism - Science topic

March 4, 2023, By Samuel Lewis Reich, slrcxh53@gmail.com, Tribco Inc.

Proofs that the gravitational. electrostatic constant and Planck's constants change value at relativistic velocities in equations applied to particles with REST mass. When in equations applied to things moving at the speed of light, they are constants even at relativistic velocities.

Givens:

The link at the end is to a PDF file containing original proofs that the axial and gravitational Doppler shifts changes observed time and distance. Others came to that conclusion also.

For objects with a test mass the frequency(f) ratio of the axial Doppler shift is

Ka=f’/f=t/t’=l/l’=[1+(v/c) cos q] implying the that of time (t) and distance (l) =1/[1+(v/c) cos q]; where ‘ is the observed, v is positive for blue shift and negative for red shift. The angle between v and a line of sight to the observer (could be and instrument) is q.

The formular for gravitational force is Fg=G (ma/ra)(mb/rb). For the case where the observer is much further than ra or rb away the a and b can be dropped because Doppler shifts for both are the same. The observed masses have a change with velocity of Doppler shift of 1/Kt=1/transverse Doppler shift for objects with a rest mass and 1 for other things. Force is

Energy(E)/time (t).

Therefore: G=(E/t)/(m/r)^2 ; ^=exponent E=mf cc (mf=mass transferred by the force). Since we are just interested in units not values.

G=r^2/(mt)

Because m, t, and r have the same transverse Doppler shift Kt can be ignore or set to one. However m has an axial Doppler shift of one (1). The axial Doppler shift of t and r = 1/Ka.

h=E/f for light E and f have the same Doppler shifts = Kt Ka and h is a constant.

For things with a rest mass:

But when applied to particles with an a rest mass as does the uncertainty principle E has a Doppler shift = Kt and f =Ka Kt. The result is the Doppler shift of h is h’/h= 1/Ka.

The uncertainty equation (let # be the symbol for uncertainty): h/4Pi = #E#t; therefore

h’/(4 Pi)= #(E Kt) (#t/(Ka Kt))=#E#t (Kt^2)(Ka). Here h is a function of q and v.

Dear enthusiastic researcher,

It's a very important area of work. As this causes premature death and world wide high priority non-communicable disease for mortality and morbidly.

I do not know, did you know about: Disability adjusted life year (DALY). It is one of evaluation or assessment method or tool use in health economics. This is very frequently use method or toll.

My personal view regard new practice is, any exploring depend on scientist or researcher. For innovation, you needs to think about your attributes first like in a situation what is the problem you identity and what are the attributes you can use to find your answer and finally, "how will you express that". That will be new approach.

Keep consider one things, you will never find so many literature on application of new method the reasons behind this is, durning study design most of the researchers find "what method mostly use world wide as world wide application will give researcher to know about the question and objective set in study. A research take long time for accomplishment and as far I observed, except trail none wants to go for that.

Lastly, my voice to this is you can try this one in own platform (work) to see the result that will give you practical answer and best assistance.

It's not 'Einstein's' theory because many scientists developed aspects of it long before him, even such as Newton, and many since :)

Fritz Caspers

I received an email today from Prof. Zeb Rocklin (School of Physics, Georgia Tech, USA) which agrees with you. He wrote, "As I understand it, the "Impossible Engine" purports to start at rest and then move forward without exchanging any momentum with its environment. That is indeed impossible in a flat spacetime. It's not impossible in a curved spacetime, but the effect is incredibly small and not, as I understand it, consistent with the empirical claims surrounding the "Impossible Engine"."

This is how I replied -

Your understanding of the Impossible Engine sounds totally correct to me. It would also apply to what I wrote about how the Engine could work. The advanced waves providing forward thrust according to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion need to be amplified trillions - maybe trillions of trillions - of times to provide the desired effect. Amplification could be achieved through the theories of Max Tegmark, MIT professor of cosmology, that the universe is literally composed of mathematics. Building on his belief, let's say electronics' binary digits (BITS) of 1 and 0 - aka base 2 maths - are the ultimate composition of, and are used to program/code for/ "draw", Mobius strips. Then two Mobius strips can unite to form a figure-8 Klein bottle. Trillions of Mobius strips can form a photon, and trillions of more complex figure-8 Klein bottles can form the more complex graviton. (The Klein is immersed, not embedded, in the 3rd dimension - a photograph of a stapler is a 2-dimensional immersion of a 3-dimensional stapler, and an immersion may have self-intersections; embeddings have no self-intersections.) If the whole universe is projected from 2D (as proposed by the holographic-universe theory), then both gravitational and electromagnetic waves must be projections from 2D, too i.e. from the Mobius strip which is made up of binary digits. Therefore, the range of frequencies (aka bandwidth) called gravitational and electromagnetic waves is composed of BITS. The universe is a mass of this gravitational-electromagnetic unification (and there is nothing except sufficient bandwidth). Since the advanced part of waves is digital and made of BITS, the advanced waves can indeed be amplified by electronics’ transistors.

There is a discrepancy in the definition of rigid motion in this thread.

According to Michael D. Foegelle:

>>They assume a shell with uniformly distributed charge undergoing "rigid" motion. I.e. the charges are stuck in place in the shell.<<

The concept of rigid motion of the charged spherical shell as defined in the paper suggested in my comment is as follows:

>> Now consider a spherical shell of charge undergoing rigid hyperbolic motion. By rigid motion we mean motion such that, at any moment, there is an instantaneous rest frame in which all parts of the body are at rest, and the physical dimensions of the body in each such frame are constant (i.e. the same in all successive instantaneous rest frames), see for example Steane (2012)<<

In this definition of rigid motion, there is no mention of the specific form of the distribution of a charge.

I wonder if the second definition implies that the distribution of charges is fixed.

Did you complete or find someone to work on project 3?

Here is a quantum theory of refractive index.

For a beautiful treatment of classical origin of refractive index, you may take a look at Feynman Lectures.

I think what is required is "what is the number of turns right next to the core, that is equivalent to the actual coil that has a large cross-sectional area?"

http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/index.html#bib has a list of references, and some equations, and you may be able to relate the inductance of the actual coil to the inductance of a single layer solenoid, and get the equivalent number of turns.

Stephen Jarvis ,

My apologies for my untimeliness in replying to an answer of yours, as follows:

📷

Stephen Jarvis added a reply

July 26, 2019

"Yes, which makes the idea of "inertia" a broad-spectrum "manner" of examination, does it not? "Inertia" applies to anything, can apply to anything. It's a "manner" of examination. The "manner", that "manner" of inertia, is in question, as ultimately it represents an idea that challenges more fundamental properties of time and space "we" as humans are not naturally conscious of. We are conscious of push-pull, sure, and so we determine ideas of "work", "effort", and "force" in our own physical structuring within that reality we are trying to understand in such a manner, "yet"......there is more, is there not, more than "push-pull inertial logic to the explanation of time and space? There clearly is.

Inertia is a "concept" of "resistance" a body prescribes by our observation of that resistance we physically force ourselves to fumble through space and time with, "and then" construct theories further with that fumbling. "Yet" we are given hints on that journey with which we can be more intellectual "with" as opposed to physical, as per our approach to the primary axioms we are seeking to calculate.

Is inertia a "field force"? Seriously, no.

Does "inertia" exist between the fundamental field forces?

Seriously, no.

If it did, it would be its own field force separate to everything.

Yet, it was our start point in the middle ground of examining reality, was, and is, it not?

Inertia is like a natural flaw we have in being human....we strive, we work, we use force....yet that is a subjective reference of control. Reality exists, and here we are examining what exists from our inertial reference we seem to be applying to reality, to time and space. Its a natural thing for us to do, sure."

MY REPLY:

I have italicized phraseology to which I strongly object on the basis of the diction, that is, the use of the English language is objectionable. The generalized reason why this observation is being made is that the authorial voice you use conflates two different domains or systems of meaningful language: (2) scientific language, terminology, and expression; and (2) discursive English prose when applied to common situations in which nonscientific yet nonetheless important matters are being discussed.

One of the important and basic key words in the passage cited above which is also in the discussion question is "inertia." Although the cited passage occurred more than two years ago, and your perspectives may have changed since then, I would like simply to express my objection to the way little or no distinction is made between the word "inertia" is employed by Isaac Newton in Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica and the ordinary dictionary meaning of the word "inertia," which is synonymous with a word such as "lethargy," implying an absence of movement ascribed to a living entity (human being, nonhuman animal). Quite obviously, Newton uses the word "inertia" with specific reference to physical bodies that belong to the cosmos of the solar system. His First Law calls attention to the fact that these planetary bodies are continuously in motion following their orbital paths around the sun because no competing body forces them to alter their accelerated movements, which are based on their respective masses. In contradistinction to this denotative meaning of the word "inertia" in Newton's Principia, the denotative meaning of the same word in ordinary discourse is, as the above cited excerpt from your reply asserts, has negative connotations, which may be regarded as "a natural flaw," in your words. In my view, it is a huge mistake to attempt to personify Newtonian inertial motion by drawing a false analogy with the familiar everyday usage.

Other examples of what I consider to be inappropriate diction could be adduced (please see italicized phrases in the above cited excerpt).

Thank you for your kind attention to these belated comments, but I did not know about this RG discussion thread question until just now.

Best wishes,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Are you sure you have defined your function correctly?

1. Usually z=x+iy. But in your function z is in the limit, thus being in both the arguments and what the integral is computed against. If z is not x+iy, the function is not a function of (x,y).

2. What do you mean by limit? Do you want to compute the case when z->0?

Dear Muhamed A. Sewidan , I would model a section of the plasmonic fiber, including the materials and their properties, and using a light source with the conditions required.

The Ansys Lumerical´s knowledge base provides useful modelling information about this issue that might be useful to you:

Hope this helps.

I think that KSY 14 (Siemens) goes up to 1T.

It existed HE144 and 244 that claimed to reach 1.5T within 2% but seems to be withdrawn

Think about the Schumann resonances of the spherical resonator earth -ionosphere which start about at 7 Hz and are partly in vacuum (ionosphere).

And very low frequencies ( around70 hz)have been used for military communication to submerged submarines.Those very big wavelength are not easy to radiate (emit and receive) since the wavelength is in yhe ballpark of serval 1000 km.(50 Hz=6000 Km)

Hi,

You See Rotman Lens Antenna, it's the same exemple,

the magnetic permeability of the air influences, so the field intensity will be better if there is no air involved

Last news: I've found this paper: "On the problem of an electrified disc located at the central opening of a coplanar earthed sheet", by A.P.S. Selvadurai, Mech. Res. Commun., 23 (6), 621-624 (1996). Although it is very short, it provides a solution. I still have to check it.

The refractive index of polymers directly related to the polarizability and depends on the wavelength of light.

If a material is structurally isotropic, then it is optically isotropic, and a single refractive index typifies the refraction behavior.

In crystals and anisotropic materials, the refractive index takes different values along different principal axes, and the material is said to be doubly refracting.

The molecular weight of polymers affects their refractive index, but its effect is not significant. In some polymers, as the molecular weight increases, the refractive index increases. For example, for Poly(ethylene oxides), when the molecular weight change from 303 to 9523, the refractive index increases 0.8% (from 1.44592 to 1.45392). While, for polycarbonate, as the molecular weight increases (from 228 to 7196), the refractive index decreases 0.95% (from 1.6021 to 1.5868).

As a result, the relation between refractive index and structural and physical properties is complicated.

I have attached one text about refractive index of polymers. I hope it would be useful.

I recommend you to use FEMM free SW for magnetic modeling.

It is free and simple to start with. It is only for 2D models (planner od cylindrical). There is an example similar to your application

You can simply modify geometry and parameters. There is a library of basic materials. In my experience, the material library excellent fit reality.

some proposals to improve the intensity of the field:

reduce the radius of the cylinder

increase the iron fraction in the epoxy

previously magnetize the iron to provide significant remanent magnetization

This seems like an old discussion but probably worth mentionning that now sparselizard is available open source, and will be amazing at doing what you want and much more. Extremely user friendly, lots of examples online, robust, fast, documented. The force will be computed using a single liner.

THE ROLE OF SIMULATION AND GAMING IN ACQUISITION STUDENTS’ COMPETENCES FOR THEIR FUTURE CAREERS

In that regard, “Simulation and Gaming”, as active methodologies, in the context of Applied Linguistics, particularly as regards Teaching, entails an innovative approach or methodology, which makes students need to argue, express their feelings and ideas, and defend their point of view, thus practicing and developing mental and emotional processes that will activate whenever he or she submit to a real communication situation, which, furthermore, develops the objectives and makes them acquire the target competences for their future professions.

Progressing in the exposed sense, Hussain and Coleman (2014) explore the theme of field leaders in serious games and professionals in entertainment games, who share practical guidelines and lessons from their own experiences researching and developing learning games. According, then, to Hussain and Coleman (2014), the method often associated with instructional system design has become known as the ADDIE. ADDIE is the acronym for the five phases in the model: Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate.

Analysis is the starting point for instructional design. Much as a software developer conducts an analysis to determine the requirements for software, an instructional designer conducts an analysis to define the performance issues and gather data for potential solutions. Various types of analyses may be conducted, but analyses of both the learners and the learning problem are essential. Learner analysis focuses on understanding what learners know, what preferences and biases they might have, and what specific performance will be expected of them, providing information to guide decisions about the content, learning strategies, and assessment approaches. Based on this information, for example, the design of a learning intervention for an experienced air traffic controller, who must demonstrate mastery of emergency procedures in a real-time simulation would likely differ in strategy, complexity, and type of feedback from instruction designed for a novice who will be expected to explain how aircraft are spaced in routine and emergency conditions. Other important analyses include content analysis (working with subject matter experts (SMEs) to assess what must be taught), context analysis, (where the product will be used physically and the curriculum in which it will be used), and task analysis (which also requires SMEs – possibly different ones).

Design and development are closely linked as the design process includes feedback loops to refine and modify instruction based on observed outcomes. Initial design requires an understanding of the subject matter (i.e., target domain) and the science of learning (e.g., how individuals learn, strategies to optimize learning and reduce interference). In the first case for the expert air traffic controller, a learning objective might be “the learner will safely manage the flight pattern during a storm and subsequent power outage.” For the novice, the learning objectives might be “the learner will provide a plan for spacing aircraft during a storm” and “the learner will provide the rationale for the distances represented in their plan.” These objectives will drive the design of the learning interventions, including the complexity of tasks, pace, and frequency and type of feedback.

To ensure subject matter knowledge, designers work closely with subject matter experts to create meaningful learning experiences. This partnership must recognize the strengths of both the designers and subject matter experts to focus on what each does best. While experts are good at what they do, designers cannot and should not expect them to always know the best way to teach specific skills. Subject matter experts may not be aware of science of learning best practices that address how people learn, best practices for feedback, or strategies to manage cognitive load that must be factored into good design. Subject matter experts also may not fully recall what it is like to learn something as a beginner or they may be constricted in thinking only of how they learned something. Subject matter experts are essential, to help the instructional designer define the tasks, working environment, and common errors learners make.

During implementation, learning products are delivered to students and data is collected to determine how well the intervention achieved its intended outcomes and to identify opportunities for improvement.

Evaluation captures both formative and summative evaluation activities. Summative evaluation occurs at the end of the instructional intervention to determine the extent to which the learning objectives were achieved.

Hussain, T. S., & Coleman, S. L. (Eds.). (2014). Design and Development of Training Games. Cambridge University Press.

Source:

· http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/51744/excerpt/9781107051744_excerpt.pdf

· http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/51744/frontmatter/9781107051744_frontmatter.pdf

In the following link, you can find another featured research, which may relate to the role of “multidisciplinary nature of learning-games development.” Source (Flexible Learning Environments):

· https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291523527_Flexible_Learning_Environments-Theories-Trends-Issues

📷Preston Guynn. added a reply on June 19, 2019:

Force, mass, and energy are a parallel set of descriptions of the effects of special relativistic Thomas Precession. All matter and space, and their interactions are described with distance in three dimensions, time, and their derivatives.

Newton's first law of motion is , "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it."

Yet the concept of motion requires at least two objects, and if there are two objects, then there is always an external force, which is gravitation.

So the idea of rewriting Newton's laws without force (or mass or energy) is good, but it should be extended to incorporate the most basic non-linear effects of motion in space time, which are special relativity and Thomas Precession.

See my article describing the recent discovery of the effects of Thomas Precession the particle and galactic scales.

Article Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space

Recommended / Share

Does this work?

One fundamental problem I am facing how to see the frequency components (in ewfd physics, frequency-domain study) in COMSOL other than the excited one( mean by the mode at other frequencies).

A very simple experiment if I take one 500nm width by 30 nm height Si waveguide (2d simulation), and excite it with 193.42 THz at port 1 end, now if I want to see the frequency components at 300 or 200 THz it should appear null or no field components. But how to observe it in COMSOL (the modes or the field components can be seen at 193.42 THz since it's the excited one).

Thank you, Greg!

Perhaps we need to define "conduction current". Conduction through what?

"Nevertheless, the question is hypothetical, and it's intention is to understand the relation between conduction and displacement currents in situation where they sum up to zero."

This implies the presence of a "conduction current" equal and opposite in sign at a particular node of the circuit, unless both currents = 0.

What is the nature of this cancelling conduction current and what is the circuit path?

As for the example of propagating EMF, the energy is being shuttled between an electric field and a magnetic field. A magnetic field is the result of a current.

Note also that the time average of the RF EMF is =0.

In the attached drawing, the electric field produced by the ac source will appear between the inner plates of the capacitor, not between the outer plates. in order create an electric field between the outer plates requires that electric charge must be added to and/or removed from one or both plates. A movement of charge is a current. Even a van de Graaf generator physically adds charge to the electrode, although the mechanism is not a conductor.

Thank you very much, Iljaz! You are very helpful.

Can you recommend some certain types of materials?

Andrew

It all depends on the parameters...what are you REALLY interested in..the field vs current ar one point..the field homogeneity..saturation properties etc etc..you may find a lot of hint in the IMMW proceedings (Intl magnet measurement workshops)and Also on the JACOW pages as well as in the CERN library ...CDS CERN..(all public access with free downloads.In addition you may look into the CERN accelerator school proceedings for magnetic measurements (via CDS CERN)

I think Preston was on the right direction. I know that the N55 are an improvement over the 2T limit in my work, but ORNL is now 3D printing magnets. My work will allow the production of super fine metal powders of more uniform shape, and should drive this upwards. Why 5T goal?

In my view, to reach 5 T you need a superconducting coil. You might get 2 T with a water cooled coil, but check the literature to be sure.

http://www.yowahbooks.com/perpendicularitis/

Dear Stefano ~

There appears to be, in your counter-arguments to what I’ve been trying to say throughout this discussion, an implicit unwarranted assumption, that electromagnetic energy can be transported only by an electromagnetic wave. But Maxwell’s equations do not warrent that assumption. As we all know, an electromagnetic wave is a very special kind of solution with in which E and B are orthogonal to each other and oscillate; they are, as you say, correlated in a special way.

In general, energy can be transported in many ways. That is a large part of what Physics is about. Wave motion is only one particular kind of situation encountered in physics problems. Energy in motion is momentum. Momentum is moving energy. That is basic physics, of which an electromagnetic phenomenon is only one particular instantiation.

Energy and momentum are observer-dependent quantities, that constitute a four-vector; they transform according to the Lorentz transformations.

Consider a very simple electromagnetic situation: a static uniform linear charge distribution. In the free space surrounding it there is an E but no B. There is an energy density but no momentum density (ie, no ‘flow’ of energy). Now transform to an moving observer. For that observer, there is a current as well as a charge. There is a B as well as an E. For that observer there is momentum as well as energy in the free space around the line. The Lorentz transformation tells us that. Momentum is moving energy – there is an energy flux density. Maxwell’s equation tell us that that energy flux density is given by E×B. In denying that you are violating either the Lorentz transformations or Maxwell’s equations, or both!

Long ago various contributers to this discussion wrote convincingly about an electron beam, in these terms. Unfortunately, those contributions are now practically inaccessible. (How many times can one be expected to keep clicking on ‘show previous answers’?!)

Hi, Chao Fu! Today I just asked my senior this question. He said that the magnetic field needs to be exported from the ANSOFT(or other magnetic field software) calculator. The values in the exported file need to be adjusted to satisfy the format of .mag. I will try it later, and we can communicate with each other about the simulation of magnetic and fliud. Best Wishes!

Thank you to everyone who has replied. Since asking this question, I discovered the MIT FastCap program, which is downloadable as C source code. In my tests, FastCap is found to calculate capacitance with very good accuracy (essential for my purpose). I plan to publish something on this in 2020.

Yes, that is correct. However in the longer paper I argue that C and D must also exist in GR.

Although I mentioned that two metrics are therefore needed, in reality only one metric is needed;- particles of class C and D just accelerate as if they have negative mass rather than positive mass in the geodetic equation (which requires that GR be generalised to allow maximal violation of the principle of equivalence).

In general you can improve the convergence by using generalized alpha with strict or intermediate time stepping. Also force the solver to take smaller maximum time steps. Get the jacobian update at each iteration. May be use the Anderson's acceleration too.

Hi Vivek Kishen Haridas ,

in the equation J = I / A, I is aligned normal to the area A. If the direction of the current is known, one has to choose a surface that is perpendicular to the direction of the current.

If your picture represents a usual coil, then the four parts form a closed circuit. The cross-sections of each of the four parts seem to be of equal magnitude, so you have to choose one of them as area A.

In exercises like this, you don't have to worry about the corners. Here, the actual cross-section is larger but you can treat the corners as if the current would change the direction in one step.

Hi Zeinab Jafari,

You can compute the photonic band structure of a 1D photonic crystal in 3D geometry in complete analogy with the example you mention from COMSOL's application library (Application ID:798). The main difference is in the normalization integral, which must be defined over volume instead of area and considering all components of the E field, instead of only the out-of-plane field Ez:

V = intop1(1)

nE = intop1(realdot(ewfd2.Ex,ewfd2.Ex) + realdot(ewfd2.Ey,ewfd2.Ey) + realdot(ewfd2.Ez,ewfd2.Ez))/V

In which case the ODE is still defined as:

1 [V^2/m^2] - nE

All the other instructions from the example should be relatively easy to extrapolate to 3D geometry. There is nevertheless one caveat as COMSOL Technical Support told me:

"What is less analogous however is how the solver defaults work. As it is a 3D model, you get a segregated solver. This is more suited for weakly coupled problems - in contrast, your global equation is only controlled by the coupling itself, making it singular when solved in its own step."

You must therefor us a fully coupled solver:

"Study 2 > Solver Configurations > Solution 2 > Stationary Solver 1, and select Fully Coupled."

I hope this can help you (if it not to late) or others to come.

Best,

Thibault Wildi

An example would be the distribution of electrical charges in an electrolytic capacitor according to electrostatics (Gauss law) at a given electrical voltage on the capacitor.

Dear. Maybe you can try: Numerical techniques in Electromagnetics. Matthew N. O. Sadiku.

Dear Joerg,

You wrote: "The transformation of two "colliding" photons into a pair of particle / anti-particle was experimentally observed already. But the observed particles are always electrically charged."

Actually, this is not what has been experimentally observed. What was observed by Anderson and a few others with bubble chambers was that "a single" electromagnetic photon of energy higher than 1.022 MeV from cosmic radiation "decoupled" into a pair of electron-positron as they grazed atomic nuclei.

Since both electron and positron are "electromagnetic" in nature, then they have both a charge and a magnetic field already. So the pair is both electric and magnetic in nature. Very familiar in high energy accelerator circles.

To your point 1, a pair such generated does not so obviously recombine back to electromagnetic photon state because the energy of the incoming photon that exceeds the 1.022 MeV required to make up the masses of the two particles remains as momentum energy causing both particle to move in opposite directions at the velocity defined by this momentum.

To your point 2, many experiments have been carried out the seem to confirm that the magnetic field of the electron constantly oscillates at the frequency defined by the energy of its mass, which makes it a timewise dipole and thus a spacewise monopole at any given instant.

Best Regards, André

I think you will find it difficult to find a solderable, lumped component that fulfills this requirement. Once you reach these capacitance values, even deviations in soldering and mounting will likely exceed the capacitance value. A small blob of solder will exhibit 100-200fF capacitance. Once you get into X band, varactor tuning is best done as part of an integrated MMIC (like an integrated VCO) where varactor package parasitics are avoided and interconnect performance can be tightly controlled.

If you are using a varactor as a discrete component for tuning a dielectric resonator filter or oscillator (DRO) , your best bet is to use transmission line elements to transform impedances so that you can use a device like the MAVR-011005-12790T. Keep in mind that parasitic inductance must also be accounted for (the MAVR-011005-12790T data sheet specifies 0.6nH for this device).

I have used the Skyworks SMV-2019 for tuning X-band phase-locked DROs with a minimum of fuss.

Thanks Rafia Raees.

Thanks for your answer@ Preston Guynn

Due to the push of high frequency high compact high density power converter, the electromagnetic issues are much more serious, compared to the traditional one, from the component level to the system level. From this point, power electronics is also one coupled system between power and electronics, and the gap between power and electronics gets smaller and smaller.

Dear Balseanu

Your effort is appreciable.

But we have different approaches. I directly explored the interaction between gravity and photon and acquired the graviton properties. In any case, I wish you success. For detail read:

Photon-Graviton Interaction and CPH Theory

Connection between quantum gravity and entanglement

Hello Umer,

the experimental installation and arrangement of your magnets is not fully clear. Perhaps you visualize the magnetic flow by iron filings (separate and in superposition). The strength of the fields must be known (Tesla?).

I assume, the electromagnet has a core. The permanent magnet magnetizes the core of the opposite magnet. If the current is switched on, two fields effect on the core. So higher the current, so stronger the influence of the electromagnet. This explains the decreasing influence of the permanent magnet with increasing current.

The divergent field at the edges causes there a stronger influence of the permanent magnet.

Generally, the magnetic flow at the corners is inhomoneneously. Therfore, opposite directions of the resulting magnetic field are possible.

Yours

R. Mitdank

Some roughly estimated numbers: In a long coil, B = 1 T would correspond to H = 8*10^5 A/m. So, if the coil would consist of flat wire, width 1 mm (including insulation) resulting in 1000 turns/m it would take a current of 800 A. (A wire with a height of about 80 mm could carry this current for arbitrary periods of time. In a short coil the current had to be even stronger.)

A (circular) coil of 10 m diameter, 10 m length, 10000 turns, and a wire cross-section of 80 mm² has an inductance of about 4.4 kH. There are some calculators for basic shapes available like this one:

The energy stored in this coil at I = 800 A is about 1.4 GWs. In order to ramp the current up from 0 A to 800 A in half a period of 15 Hz = 33.3 ms, about 105 MV were need for the whole coil or 10,5 kV per turn if each turn would be controlled separately.

It's obvious that current pulses of some microseconds length are not feasible.

If your application would permit a constant magnetic field that seems to be the only way to do it.

The analogue to the medium (dielectric) between the plates of capacitors is the core inside coils. While the effect of the dielectric depends on its permittivity, the effect of the core depends on its permeability. In both cases, the medium is polarized by an externally applied field.

Of course, media between capacitor plates and media inside (and around) coils are only the two simplest configurations. Electrically or magnetically (or both) polarizable media can be located anywhere in electromagnetic near fields or far fields.

There are several types of magnetic relaxation (nuclear, electron, ferromagnetic) but while relaxation refers to the process of reaching an equilibrium after a change of conditions, hysteresis involves a (possibly) permanent state, dependent on the past. So, there could be hysteresis with relaxation, and vice versa.

I'm having the same problem.

I hope you can help me if you've found a way to simulate such system.

Thanks.

Direct measuring of eddy currents is simply impractical. Yes, you can attach electrodes to the media, where you excite currents, and measure the current directly. This will be called a transformer.

Measuring eddy currents is a special area of NDT. NDT, nondestructive, in most cases means non-interfering with the media, or often just non-contact, or indirect.

So, probably your question is reduced to high-resolution methods of measuring eddy currents, where you avoid cancelling of mid-range magnetic field, by observing current flow microstructure.

A lot of patents were written, and secrets are hidden by companies. So no one can help you. I can just give a hint: if you examine flat surfaces in direct proximity, you can use magneto-optics (faraday, kerr-effect) to image excitation. But the application of the method is difficult because of really very close proximity.

Electric Flux Density, D, is a conceptual/graphical vector field that we use to get a “feel” for a complicated electric field made by source charges. What is exactly an electric flux, as you ask, is called a flux line. A flux line represents the trajectory a positive test charge would take if placed at that point, or the force a positive test charge would experience if placed at that point.¹ Flux lines aren’t real, they’re just useful for visualization, and the number of them that emanate from a charge is arbitrarily set; in SI units, 1 flux line will emanate from 1 C.²

I would also like to point out that the answer given by André Michaud is verbatim the definition of electric current, and must be a misunderstanding of your question.

1. from Introduction to Electrodynamics by Griffiths

2. From Elements of Electromagnetics by Sadiku

P.S. If it is not possible to let air or liquid flow through the electromagnets, it would be very useful to enlarge the surface area of the housing, e. g. by strapping or glueing (there are thermally conductive adhesives available) heat sinks to the housing. Unfortunately, many heat sinks have a plane surface on one side while the housing of your electromagnets is cylindrical. Since the area of contact between housing and heat sink should be as large as possible, this is an application for custom made heat sinks. Aluminum is a good compromise between thermal conductivity and price.

I am aware of at least one highly nontrivial collective effect with 3 entities: Efimov states. Much simplified, it's existence of trimer where there is no dimer.

Ed,

Thanks you for your attention about scoring...and your attempt to police RG. But me, as well as Hans and others have been on RG for a long time, and we know to ignore rude people "who know all", or repeat like parrots what they believe to have understood in the books of their masters. I spend a good deal of my time on RG, less to praise my articles or books, than to help people to understand some difficult issues. Of course read my papers can help, and it seems that you have some reading to catch, notably on Clifford algebras, and mathematics.

In my post I underline 3 points :

- Clifford algebras are algebraic structures built on any vector space endowed with a scalar product. If you want to establish a relation with tensors in Relativist Geometry you need fiber bundles...even in Special Relativity.

- Rather than focus on the many denominations of types of vectors in a Clifford bundle, it is good to understand, from a general point of view, how they work. Notably transposition, adjoint map, exponential,...And to notice that the vector space from which the Clifford algebra originates has a special role.

- it is usually (in QTF) acknowledged that the EM field is represented by U(1), which is a commutative group. And not difficult to see that the Clifford algebra has a center, which includes for even dimensions, the scalars. In a unified theory of fields the natural representation of the EM field is through the scalars in a Clifford algebra.

It is difficult to give useful solution to it unless the elaborate details of the specific system is provided.

1) Please use electromagnet simulators eg. FEMM (http://www.femm.info/wiki/HomePage) to get an idea of the current requirements and the approximate dimension within which you want the design to be.

2) Also the details of the volume in which you want the field to be uniform has to be considered. This depends on the size of the sample on which you want field to be applied etc.

If you just need constant magnetic field, just try permanent magnets (Rare earth magnets can easily provide this field occupying much lesser space as well.)

Check with "GMW Associates" for electromagnets design/purchase.

Dear Ed Gerck,

"Regarding the non-inertial frames in special relativity"

The existence of non-inertial frames in special relativity, is a fundamental problem of the Einstein 's theory of relativity. So far known to me Einstein himself had not said any thing about it. Of course, we study the relativistic transformation equations of acceleration and force, the rate of change of the velocity with respect to the mass and the energy-momentum tensor of a distribution of matter in special relativity etc. , where the acceleration or the force are considered in an inertial frame. these considerations are against the basic nature of the inertial frame.

Let us consider a non-inertial frame in the special relativity i.e. we have two inertial frames moving with a constant acceleration relative to each other. The main problem in this consideration is what would be the maximum amount of acceleration which a particle ( massive or non-massive) may have ? Only then, the problem of non-inertial frames in the special relativity may be meaningful.

Regards

Ramesh Chandra

What kind of control do you want to have?

Simplest way is to put magnetic material in the polymer and control that from outside using magnet (something like this https://www.nature.com/articles/nmat3090).

Depending on which direction you want to observe your E or H fields distribution (phase and magnitude) you can define your reference plane at any distance you want (by modelling a shaped plane along xoy,xoz..) then define your monitor at the frequency of interest and finally run the simulation. After simulation you can explore the results in the navigation tree as usual.

Hope this helps!

Have anyone found out the solution? I am also suffering from this problem.

Have you seen this blog post?

Usually any capacitor INcreases it C-value with frequency. (Foster theorem).This can be nicely visualized when you display the S11 of such a device in the Smith Chart.(there the capacitor is at 3..4 o clock=open or somewhat below depending on frequency)..at some point the capacitor passes through its first self resonance (9 o clock and becomes inductive).This is another visualisation of the well known Feynman chapter"capacitor at high frequencies" where the parallle plate capacitor becomes a pillbox cavity.Now for the interdigital C the static capacity can be calcuated by numerical or analytical means.When talking about about technical capacitors applied in electronic circuits we can neglect the dielectric material dispersion.However for biological applications things are much more complicated.(electromagntic models of the skin)

Hi Fraser Cripps,

For the COMSOL simulations, I hope the following URL might help (examples with detailed intuitive documents offered by the official website).

For papers, I hope the following articles might help.

1. J.B. Pendry, et al, Magnetism from conductors and enhanced nonlinear phenomena, IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 47 2075 (1999).

2. Schurig D, Mock J J, Justice B J, et al. Metamaterial electromagnetic cloak at microwave frequencies. Science, 2006, 314(5801): 977-980.

3. Li G, et al, Continuous control of the nonlinearity phase for harmonic generations, Nature Materials, 14(6), 607, 2015.

4. Lee J. et al, Giant nonlinear response from plasmonic metasurfaces coupled to intersubband transitions, Nature 511, 65-69 (2014).

These papers are about nonlinear optics. While I am not quite sure if they address your need in varactor diode... I hope they may help.

Good luck! Regards,

Yuan

Just posting to say thanks for the advice, in the end, in case either of you are interested; I decided to use solidworks to draw in 2d, I sketched my top copper track, my substrate and my bottom copper wire, exported to a dxf file and then sent it off to various companies for quotes. Once I receive the structures I will perform some experiments and let you know how it goes.

The book

By Igorʹ Mikhaĭlovich Ternov, V. V. Mikhailin, V. R. Khalilov

includes Blewett's work and also discusses the effect of quantum effects on syncrotron radiation (which is relevant to the original question) and deals with synchrotron radiation in constant uniform magnetic field.

Dear Andrew,

Sure! No doubt about that. The problem is that a photon is always made by a magnetic and electric field: both are necessary. Thus the whole magnetic field, that is assumed to be formed by photons, must have an special form of phtons and also different than the ones of the electric field. Some time ago I have made such a question trying to glue the point of view of QED and Classical Electrodynamics, but I didn't obtain a convincing answer so far.

Dear Carringtone,

It can be shown that the magnetic field of electron is timewise monopolar by structure at any given moment.

This experiment easily carried out brings the proof that magnetic fields for which both poles coincide by structure can only be monopoles at any given instant, since both poles cannot be present at the same location at the same moment. Since electrons systematically behave point-like, both of their magnetic poles have to coincide by structure:

Best Regards

André

Light may be "massless" in the strictest sense, but it still has energy and momentum, if E=hf, and E=mc^2, then the effective mass of a photon (even in a vacuum), is then m = hf/c^2.