Electromagnetic Waves According to New Electromagnetism

Menaus · November 2014

<t>After reading a bit more of Distinti's texts on Electromagnetic induction, I discovered that electromagnetic waves do not have an electric portion to them -- they are a purely magnetic phenomenon. 
 
This bugs me a lot. Often, Distinti argues over the impossibility of CE's view of EM radiation due to the lack of a medium for said waves to travel. Now, Distinti claims the waves have no potential energy. This bugs me just as much as a claim that there can be no medium. By the very definition of wave, New Induction is not a wave. Where is the delineation for near field coupling between a transformer, and far field coupling between antennae? Are there no such thing as Electromagnetic waves? How do non-ferrus metallic plates block electromagnetic radiation? Doesn't this mean that a faraday-cage should not affect a signal? 
 
What about reciprocity? Doesn't it follow that if we have a magnetic-only wave, we should have an electric-only wave, as illogical as both of those are? Moreover, New Induction basically models acceleration of charge, or changes in current. Consider the case where we have a circuit with a constant current and a changing voltage. What about the acceleration of this voltage? 
 
Perhaps I'm jumping the gun a bit. Since New Electromagnetism only concerns itself with the effects of the source on the target, perhaps this only means that what ends up moving the charges of the target is the magnetic field, while what happens between source and target is ambiguous. This would be satisfactory, and make sense within the framework of the theory. 
 
So are electromagnetic waves purely a magnetic phenomenon, or do we leave this discussion to Ethereal Mechanics? 
 
P.S. I also want to address an argument given by Distinti on Video #16: The Antenna Paradox. In this video, Distinti reconciles said antenna paradox by considering how much the receiving antenna would have if it received 2 amperes from two batteries in parallel. He dismisses the possibility of the antenna receiving 2 volts from two batteries because it is ambiguous as to which how the voltage of the transmitting antennae combine. However, if this latter is ambiguous, shouldn't the former be ambiguous as well? Distinti stated something along the lines of "It's ambiguous because we don't know which battery is on the top or on the bottom", so shouldn't it also be ambiguous as to whether which battery is on the left or on the right in the other case? 
 
What it seems to me is that Distinti's beforehand knowledge that "Electromagnetic Induction is a magnetic phenomenon only" may be affecting his argument. In any case, it seems to me that the analogy between the batteries and electromagnetic waves is simply incomplete and thus should be discarded. Or else, Distinti is misapplying RoA #17 for the case of battery-on-battery stacking. If this is the case, another problem shows up. 
 
If both the current and voltage analogical models give us the same results, then THAT is an ambiguity in and of itself. But only when we consider the case from the limited view given. We are only given power, so it should obviously be ambiguous as to what the voltage and current are. The same is the case if we were given the power of an electrical circuit and asked to then give the voltage and current. It is an ambiguity of the problem itself, and not of theory. The voltage and current could simply be in one battery as the field combine at the target, and then we end up with a voltage and current of sqrt(2). 
 
Perhaps this analogy actually shows that far-field effects may be more related to an actual circuit than we realize. 
 
Anyway, this post script has gotten a bit out of hand, and off-topic. I'll leave it here though just for the sake of discussion. However, let me repeat the original question just to keep us on track for now. 
 
So are electromagnetic waves purely a magnetic phenomenon, or do we leave this discussion to Ethereal Mechanics?</t>

SebastianG · November 2014

<r>Hi Menaus, 
interesting thoughts! My first answer would be that there are only electro-magnetic waves with potential (electric field) and velocity (magnetic field). 
 
<s></s><s></s>But <e></e><e></e>is this always the case? 
 
<s></s><s></s>Induction:<e></e><e></e> 
An electrical current <s></s>in<e></e> a wire creates a magnetic field <s></s>around<e></e> the wire. In case there is an alternating current inside the wire the magnetic field is also alternating. If there is a second wire near, the alternating magnetic field induces an alternating electrical current inside the second wire. 
 
<s></s><s></s>Electrostatic:<e></e><e></e> 
A charged capacitor creates an electrical field between the two conductors. So no magnetic field because only moving charges creates magnetic fields. 
 
<s></s><s></s>Light wave:<e></e><e></e>: 
A light wave could be an electromagnetically wave with both parts. The electrical and magnetic fields are 90° out of phase. Interesting if you use a capacitor with an alternating electrical field, the voltage and current are also 90°out of phase 
 
<s></s><s></s>Conclusions:<e></e><e></e> 
It seems to me that the electric and magnetic fields can either be separated or combined. 
 
I'm only a mechanical engineer, so no guarantee my thoughts are correct <E>:?</E> 
Would someone with more electrical engineering background please help me <E>:)</E></r>

Walter Verbrugggen · November 2014

<t>I don't know which text you're mentioning. 
What i understand is electromagnetic waves have to exist with both fields. To maintain the energy, this waves oscillate and convert electric energy into magnetic energy and vice versa. 
the waveforms of electric and magnetic field should have a phase difference of 90 degrees to maintain the energylevel. 
 
The antenna paradox 
There is no difference between the stacked batteries or the parallel current sources. The mayor explanation is that we should treat em waves as current waves placed parallel. 
You're talking also about the far-field effect, but the video is also about the far-field of two antennas, and is related to actual circuits. 
 
I don't understand what's not clear to you..</t>

Distinti · November 2014

<t>Hi Walter, 
I'm only going to answer the first part of you question (everything before the PS) 
 
A wave must contain both a kinetic energy component and a potential energy component. 
 
The potential energy component can not be an electric field (coulomb) as professed. 
 
Thus something else is going on. 
 
in the latest Q vector video it is shown that a coulomb field is the by-product of pretons in a ton. 
 
There is another Distinti university course on wave mechanics which is required before we can start putting the pieces to the puzzle of light together. 
 
The problem with both New Electromagnetism and CE is that these are just source to target effects; neither describe how the effects disturb the medium between. 
 
proper wave mechanics is a description of how the medium behaves, this behavior, in turn, must agree with our observations on how one charge affects another across the medium.</t>

Electromagnetic Waves According to New Electromagnetism

Comments

About Cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.