electrostatic rotation
Dan Bloomquist
http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~wistrom/
1. This is a hoax or bad experiment.
2. This is real and rocks physics.
Best, Dan.
Dharma Fog
There are non-metallic objects smaller then an atom,
which appear to be massless, carry no electrical charge,
are bosons, and have spin 1,-1.
They're called photons.
Spaceman
"Dharma Fog" <Dhar...@VirtualMachines.COM> wrote in message news:3E909840...@VirtualMachines.COM...
<ROFLOL>
yup,
and there is also a photon fairy!
Spaceman
"Dan Bloomquist" <lak...@citlink.net> wrote in message news:3E908726...@citlink.net...
>
> http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~wistrom/
>
> 1. This is a hoax or bad experiment.
> 2. This is real and rocks physics.
2!
It rocks physics,
and physics has been full of massless doo doo for way too long
and this finally is finding some "facts" instead of some more math caused doo doo.
:)
Dan Bloomquist
Well the phenomena is cause by charge, electrons, fermions with spins of
+1/2,-1/2. And there is no classical analog for electron spin. As this
is a macro phenomena I doubt it has anything to quantum physics.
And the torque described in the link is not part of any theory of
electrodynamics I know of.
Best, Dan.
Mathew Orman
"Dharma Fog" <Dhar...@VirtualMachines.COM> wrote in message
news:3E909840...@VirtualMachines.COM...
Still no single experiment describing evidence that space has speed limiting
properties!
Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
Dharma Fog
>
[snip]
Actually, I just read the conclusion which states in part
According to the received view spin is a component of the
angular momentum for which there is neither a classical
analogue nor a concrete physical picture.
Evidently, they're referring to quantum mechanical spin since
the earth is a concrete physical picture of classical spin.
And
We propose that spin is the result of the continuum of
static charges residing on the surface of the metal spheres
is overstating the results to say the least.
And their conclusion get worse.
But to answer your question, no, I didn't really try to figure out
what's going on - I lost interest after reading the conclusion.
Incidently, Boop, Haag and Rosen modeled spin as a quantum mechanical
top sometime in the 50's and showed it satisfied the Pauli spin
equation in the presence of an electromagnetic field.
Timo Nieminen
> Dharma Fog wrote:
> > Dan Bloomquist wrote:
> >
> >>http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~wistrom/
> >>
> >>1. This is a hoax or bad experiment.
> >>2. This is real and rocks physics.
> >
> > There are non-metallic objects smaller then an atom,
> > which appear to be massless, carry no electrical charge,
> > are bosons, and have spin 1,-1.
> >
> > They're called photons.
>
> Well the phenomena is cause by charge, electrons, fermions with spins of
> +1/2,-1/2. And there is no classical analog for electron spin. As this
> is a macro phenomena I doubt it has anything to quantum physics.
>
> And the torque described in the link is not part of any theory of
> electrodynamics I know of.
Some numbers would be nice. If there's any DC ripple in the power supply,
the system will radiate and rotate from the torque due to the radiation of
angular momentum.
--
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
Dan Bloomquist
Timo Nieminen wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Apr 2003, Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>
>
>>Dharma Fog wrote:
>>
>>>Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~wistrom/
>>>>
>>>>1. This is a hoax or bad experiment.
>>>>2. This is real and rocks physics.
>>>
>>>There are non-metallic objects smaller then an atom,
>>>which appear to be massless, carry no electrical charge,
>>>are bosons, and have spin 1,-1.
>>>
>>>They're called photons.
>>
>>Well the phenomena is cause by charge, electrons, fermions with spins of
>>+1/2,-1/2. And there is no classical analog for electron spin. As this
>>is a macro phenomena I doubt it has anything to quantum physics.
>>
>>And the torque described in the link is not part of any theory of
>>electrodynamics I know of.
>
>
> Some numbers would be nice. If there's any DC ripple in the power supply,
> the system will radiate and rotate from the torque due to the radiation of
> angular momentum.
>
At one point I found a Physics Review paper but not being a member, they
wanted $20 to download. I may think it's well worth it tomorrow. If
there are some good numbers and this is a good experiment, well...
You may recall the thought experiment I had tried to resolve about a
spinning magnet.
It's late, good night.
Best, Dan.
Dan Bloomquist
Dharma Fog wrote:
> Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> Actually, I just read the conclusion which states in part
>
> According to the received view spin is a component of the
> angular momentum for which there is neither a classical
> analogue nor a concrete physical picture.
>
> Evidently, they're referring to quantum mechanical spin since
> the earth is a concrete physical picture of classical spin.
>
I don't know that it wasn't just poorly written, put together from the
original paper by a freshman. They could have been referring to the lack
of connectivity of L with 'something else'. After all, L is implicit in
GR, we simply take it for granted.
> And
>
> We propose that spin is the result of the continuum of
> static charges residing on the surface of the metal spheres
>
> is overstating the results to say the least.
>
> And their conclusion get worse.
>
> But to answer your question, no, I didn't really try to figure out
> what's going on - I lost interest after reading the conclusion.
>
What matters is the experimental results.
I'm not so interested in the interpretation. I'd searched as much as I
could on this and apparently Anders Wistrom has done quite a bit of work
with electrostatics. It gives his results some credibility. Until this
is verified or shown to lack confirmation, we can't be sure.
> Incidently, Boop, Haag and Rosen modeled spin as a quantum mechanical
> top sometime in the 50's and showed it satisfied the Pauli spin
> equation in the presence of an electromagnetic field.
I'll do some work on this.
Best, Dan.