Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 15 subscribers
  • Views 200 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in

Electromagnetic Radiation Power contains a 3D volume of energy

CliveS

Many  physicists cannot understand that AC 50/60 cycle per second power is in fact contains low frequency electromagnetic light.

On physics forums they quote Maxwell's laws but forget his corkscrew rule which shows the direction of spin of a magnetic inertia field.

The current induced magnetic flux is at right angles to current and an area of magnoflux spinning in x.y direction.

Faradays Left hand 3 finger rule indicates if the voltage force is at right angles in flux-current area then we produce power .

If the current in x direction and flux in y direction or voltage in z direction are not at right angles then a Cosine reduction in real power occurs.

This virtual or quantum power is measured in VAr.'s and can be either Capacitive or Inductive as the volume has been squeezed.

Does anyone know how to better describe this concept to physicists.

Parents

  • Which physicists do not understand it ? I'd argue that any working in the field designing antennas, particle accelerators, RF equipment and so on probably do!
    The 4 equation view of Maxwell's equations is standard 2nd year physics  stuff on any recognised UK degree course, shortly after getting the undergraduate maths up to the level where everyone is happy with vector calculus, including use of div grad and curl, and that nabla squared represents something to which both wavelike and transient solutions are possible, much as second derivative for simple harmonic motion.

    The problem at lower frequencies that often arises is visualizing the physical extent of the photons and their capture volumes, which at 50Hz are of course massive, so most human scale problems are quasi-static, and so more easily (better ?)  solved in terms of scalar field potentials, or as we more normally call them, voltages and currents.

    Knowing which model is easiest to reach for (scalar potentials, fields, waves - including solitons, photons) all of which describe the same thing is a skill acquired over time and a few goes of doing it the hard way.

    I'd not get too hung up with online chatter between folk who have not yet grasped the concepts, nor on folk specializing in other aspects at different scales such as nuclear physics or astronomy.


    Mike

Reply

  • Which physicists do not understand it ? I'd argue that any working in the field designing antennas, particle accelerators, RF equipment and so on probably do!
    The 4 equation view of Maxwell's equations is standard 2nd year physics  stuff on any recognised UK degree course, shortly after getting the undergraduate maths up to the level where everyone is happy with vector calculus, including use of div grad and curl, and that nabla squared represents something to which both wavelike and transient solutions are possible, much as second derivative for simple harmonic motion.

    The problem at lower frequencies that often arises is visualizing the physical extent of the photons and their capture volumes, which at 50Hz are of course massive, so most human scale problems are quasi-static, and so more easily (better ?)  solved in terms of scalar field potentials, or as we more normally call them, voltages and currents.

    Knowing which model is easiest to reach for (scalar potentials, fields, waves - including solitons, photons) all of which describe the same thing is a skill acquired over time and a few goes of doing it the hard way.

    I'd not get too hung up with online chatter between folk who have not yet grasped the concepts, nor on folk specializing in other aspects at different scales such as nuclear physics or astronomy.


    Mike

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines