[geocentrism] Re: magnetism and inverse sq.
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 10:22:31 +1000
I don't Know Jack. As said below, only doing the experiment will tell.
Guessing, I would say it does not change but is constant, and maybe as Robert
said per d^3.. a monopole (like gravity) is simple, but the di-pole makes for
more complexity. I will do the experiment when wifey is not around in the
kitchen.
I would be keen to see if the forces vary at the same rate proportional to
distance for repulsion as they would for attraction.
Another point to consider. Using established lines of force theory for
magnetism, and looking at the old iron filings maps, proximate magnets in
attraction mode, draw all or nearly all of the magnetic lines of force
together, compressing them into a smaller space, the closer the objects get.
This surely has to alter the amount of attraction differently at a higher rate
of change with distance, that is not linear as a constant.
You are korect. I have not looked very hard for the spell cheker in Outlook
express. Perhaps it is the Irish rebel in me. But I do try harder when writing
to Martin.
By the way, quadrated does sound strange. Is it correct or did I coin a new
word.. like quintated sextated, octated, cant get one for 7th.
Philip.
a.. From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
b.. To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
c.. Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 13:22:28 +0100
Hi Philip,
It's me again!
I would interested to know how the transition between quadrated and cubed force
would appear in a graph. If this relationship is true then there would need to
be a massive jump from one to the other for a very tiny change in distance.
Regards
Jack Lewis
PS Philip I notice that you still haven't got your spell-checker working!
Because I couldn't afford to buy MS 'Office' and its own spell checker, I had
to buy a separate one.
----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
To: geocentrism list
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 5:21 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: magnetism and inverse sq.
In your citation, the far pole has to be very far to satisfy your
postulation...
I guess doing the experiment and measuring the force will be the only way of
resolution .. Is it cubed or quadrated..May be it is quadrated close, cubed a
bit further away and squared further away still .. Im only interested in
proximate examples..
I noticed a reason to question the experiment .. hence I wondered, at the
result had they both been U magnets, a more realistic term than horseshoe..
when the distance between the poles become more equal..
I might try it..
Phil
Funny no one came back with an answer to my query re a spherical shell
magnet...
Other related posts:
