[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: TC Electrostatics (fwd)



Tesla List wrote:
> 
> Subscriber: lod-at-pacbell-dot-net Sat Jan  4 21:53:27 1997
> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 18:18:32 -0800
> From: lod-at-pacbell-dot-net
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: TC Electrostatics (fwd)
> 
> Richard Wayne Wall wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> > I believe you are in error above in stating " . . . but any electric
> > fields will only be parallel to the axis of the wire . . ."  In an
> > electrodynamic circuit the electric field is perpendicular to the axis
> > of the conductor.
> >
> > For a discription, imagine a round black dot drawn on a paper.  Around
> > the dot draw multiple concentric circles and also multiple radial lines
> > out from the dot.  If the dot represents a cross section of the
> > conductor with the conductor going into and coming out of the paper,
> > the concentric circles represent magnetic field lines of force and the
> > radial lines represent electric field lines.  The electric field
> > radiates out perpendicular to the longitudnal axis of the conductor.
> >
> > This description is by Charles Steinmetz for electrodynamic currents in
> > a conductor.  It seems not to support your interpretation of these
> > experimental results.
> >
> > RWW
> 
> But if there is no longitudinal electric field along the wire, why do
> the charges flow down the wire?
> 
> -GL


I would tend to agree with Greg and Ed on this one due to my recent 
experiments.  When real current is flowing, (electrodynamically), the 
magnetic effect is the thing, and the radial electric field lines 
disappear.  The classic radial electic field lines are for static or 
undulating surface charges only as in the Eqipotential surfaces example 
found in the Yost, wiggle wand- ball-wire-ball-detector system where no 
current flows, no mag fields are generated, but potential waves do pass 
over the system of conductive wires and dielectrics.

Richard Hull, TCBOR