Relation between the Gravitational and Magnetic Fields | OMICS International
Hz) electric fields are mainly due to thunderstorms. Frequencies from zero The last two relations are valid only at positions at least two to three times the inter-phase dis- tance, away from .. sion used in some marketing of such panels . dential exposure to magnetic fields, occupational studies include electric and relation to electrical occupations. .. sales and marketing, auto and truck. The aim of this article is to establish a relationship between electron mass and James Clerk Maxwell described the electric and magnetic fields using a set of.
Magnetic field estimation by numeric simulations Other research projects take a different approach and analyze the problem by means of finite element method FEM simulations and even analytical approximations. FEM simulations are helpful to better understand the problem, to analyze magnetic field exposure dependence on certain parameters for instance, by performing sensitivity analysisand to develop a predictive methodology. Being able to estimate magnetic field exposure without actually having to perform measurements could prove extremely useful for EV designers.
As proposed in Ref. Both figures have been reused with permission. This is the approach taken in Refs. Simulation results are validated with experimental measurements in both cases, and then they are used to estimate the worst operating points from the point of view of passenger exposure.
Electric and magnetic fields - Elia
Design guidelines In this section, some design guidelines and recommendations to minimize magnetic field exposure in EVs are provided. Note that all these measures are of pure electric nature, and therefore they may not be applicable when considering other factors. In other words, the goal is to maintain exposure levels as low as reasonably possible with the available means, both in a technical and in an economic sense.
This criterion allows the implementation of safety strategies at an acceptable cost, and it should preferably be applied during the first design stages of the EV and its components. These guidelines are classified into two groups, depending on whether they involve major changes in the vehicle or not.
The first group contains measures that do not change the topology nor the configuration of the vehicle, and that do not increase its weight nor its cost: A general design guideline is to place the power devices and their connections as far from the passengers as possible. However, a vehicle usually provides little room to maneuver in this sense, especially in the case of hybrid electric vehicles.
Passenger Exposure to Magnetic Fields in Electric Vehicles
The battery stack, the electronic converters, and the motor should be as far away as possible from the passengers. Batteries are usually placed just under the seats, in order to minimize risks in case of crash.
However, this involves bringing them closer to the passengers. A compromise should be reached. Complementary, power devices should be oriented so that the magnetic field suffered by the passengers is minimized. As described in Section 4, some power equipment such as batteries and inverters could generate stronger fields in some specific directions [ 6364 ].
Therefore, their relative direction with respect to the passengers should be carefully chosen. Wires of the same type should be as close as possible of each other: This way, the magnetic field generated by each cable in the interior of the vehicle will be cancelled by the rest.
Wires should be as short as possible, except when this involves bringing them closer to the passengers. When placing batteries below the seats, the battery pack can be redesigned in order to allow terminals to be placed at the bottom.
This would increase the distance from the stack connections to the passengers in a value equal to the height of the battery cells. This is very convenient, given that those connections are usually close to the occupants, they carry currents up to hundreds of amperes, and it is very difficult to place them together so the magnetic field generated by all of them as a whole is cancelled out.
Notice that this action does not necessarily increase the distances between the passengers and the cells themselves. If further actions were necessary in order to reduce the magnetic field generated by the EV, these additional measures may prove helpful: Longer distances between power equipment and passengers are always welcome.
This explanation explains diffraction - however, the same mechanism can't be applied to empty space. Is there any answer that can be seized upon by the layman, or is it one of those things like sqrt -1that can only be understood in the realms of mathematics? Even there, is there a firm understanding of what it is, rather than what its properties are? You're right that in general we don't know all the ingredients of the world. We probably don't even know the basic form of the theory, how spacetime emerges from some deeper forms, etc.
Nevertheless, within the context of what we do know, there is no special mystery to magnetism. In fact, magnetism is part of the electroweak theory, which is the best-known theory we have of anything. It predicts, for example, the magnetism of an electron to better than one part in one hundred billion.Electric Field vs Magnetic Field - Differences between Electric and Magnetic Fields
The waves you mention are all describable as a type of behavior of underlying media- water, air, etc. At a deeper level, however, the ingredients of the universe photons, quarks, neutrinos, gluons, Photons are as basic as any of the other ingredients we have.
Maybe someday some deeper ingredients will be found and all of our currently fundamental particle fields will be seen as emerging from the behavior of that deeper theory. Will the deeper theory then turn out to emerge from a still deeper one? Will that pattern go on forever or reach a deepest level? If some point is reached with no basic dangling ends, then maybe we will be at the deepest level. I would like to ask a seemingly daft question. What is the experimental evidence for the traditional idea of magnetic fields?
We need to remember that the idea of a rotating perpendicular flux was based on an ignorance of magnetism - orbiting and spinning electrons were unknown years ago. I have asked in vain for evidence of this flux. It seems to be just a guess which turned into a belief. Suppose magnets had been unknown at the time. Experiments with electricity would then have led to a simple law: This basic law then explains magnetism, such as the alignment of iron filings around a magnet.
Hence magnetic forces just act along the straight lines between moving charges. This is the same simple principle that works for electrostatic forces between stationary charges. We need not assume the universe uses two completely different force mechanisms. Motion just modifies electrostatic forces. Magnetic fields are defined as continuous. Now imagine a magnet made of a very viscous material that allows a free-moving north pole to drift within it.
Influence of Permanent Magnets With Network Cabling - Siemon
We should not view magnets as perpetual motion machines. Forces begin and end at points: Lines of flux show how magnetic compasses are deflected, but nothing is circulating except charges. The notion of circular fields perhaps arose when rings of iron filings were seen around a conducting wire, but it was a very odd idea.
The circular magnetic field at any point is defined as a vector that is perpendicular to the magnetic force it produces. However, if a vector represents something that demonstrably exists, e. So we can say that a circulating magnetic field having its greatest effect in a perpendicular direction does not exist.
A magnetic field is no more mysterious than an electric one. You're right that the forces between classical currents with fairly static arrangements can be expressed directly in terms of the currents and the displacements between them. It's not as simple as electrostatics because the direction of the displacement and the directions of the currents enter in a slightly more complicated. But still, for that case the use of magnetic field descriptions is just an optional mathematical convenience.
It would be extremely inconvenient to describe electromagnetic waves e. Once you wish to include quantum spins, descriptions that leave out magnetic fields or even more abstract entities vector potentials. Practical magnetic materials all involve such spins. Doesn't a physical interaction necessarily produce a change of some kind?
Even in a pure vacuum, there is a lot going on i. Could you perhaps expand some more on what you mean regarding the interactions between atomic particles and virtual photons in this sense? Also, why is language that indicates interactive motion between particles "fluctuating around" used if there is no motion in sub-atomic clouds such as that of virtual photons, and could you explain more clearly how the physics of motion break down at sub-atomic scales, if this is indeed what happens?
A physical interaction doesn't necessarily mean that something is going on, at least in the usual sense of the words. For example, think of a box sitting on the floor. The box and the floor are certainly interacting. But not much is going on. Nevertheless, the field spread isn't changing in time. I think the sloppy language is used because we instinctively try to squeeze quantum reality into classical pictures.
First of all, there is a big difference between static fields and electromagnetic induction. According to official science, magnetism is a "side effect" of an electric current and both forces magnetic and electric are just 2 sides of the same coin electromagnetism.
Electrostatic and magnetostatic fields are 2 different aspects of physical matter. Electrostatic field doesn't affect a compass needle, but it affects metals, like aluminium - on which magnetostatic field has no visible effect, while clearly affecting other magnetic fields.
Electrostatic field is generated by tension between opposite electric charges. Electric force is "powered" by differential of quantities, which want to be nullified by reaching a neutral value, just like opposite air pressure systems or water level in connected containers. You need somekind of imbalance in neutral matter, to make it electrically charged - what is often connected with additional work.
Magnetic field is driven by opposing orientations and can be generated by electrically neutral matter. Pernament magnets don't need any additional work, to generate magnetic fields.
Opposite polarities are attracted to eachother, but they don't cancel eachother out - if you connect 2 magnets, they will work as a single magnet and the magnetic field will be stronger.
In the 17th and 18th Centuries, electromagnetic phenomena were studied separately. James Clerk Maxwell described the electric and magnetic fields using a set of equations inunifying the two fields into one: In Newtonian physics, the gravitational field is defined as the force per unit mass that experiences a point particle in the presence of a mass. In general relativity, gravity is due to the curvature of space time.
The presence of a mass curves space time, causing bodies to move along those lines curves denominated geodesic. General relativity assumes that space time is continuous. However, there is no experimental evidence for it.
Are space and time continuous? Or are we only convinced of that continuity as a result of education? In recent years, both physicists and mathematicians have asked whether it is possible that space and time are discrete. Quantification of space time allows us to distinguish elementary particles from each other in a simple and natural way [ 23 ].
Minimum volume, length or area are measured in the units of Planck [ 1 ]. Theories related to quantum gravity, such as string theory and doubly special relativityas well as black hole physics, predict the existence of a minimum length [ 45 ]. The familiar concept of a spacetime continuum implies that it should be possible to measure always smaller and smaller distances without any finite limit [ 2 ].
Heisenberg, who insisted on expressing quantum mechanical laws in terms of measurable observables, questioned already the validity of this postulate [ 6 ]. Heisenberg said that physics must have a fundamental length scale, and with Planck's constant h and the speed of light c, allow the derivation of the masses of the particles [ 78 ]. A fundamental minimal length scale naturally emerges in any quantum theory in the presence of gravitational effects that accounts for a limited resolution of space-time.
Padmanabhan shows that the Planck length provides a lower limit of length in any suitable physical space-time [ 1011 ]. It is impossible to construct an apparatus which will measure length scales smaller than Planck length. These effects exist even in flat space-time because of vacuum fluctuations of gravity [ 11 ]. Quantum particles in discrete spacetime are studied in relation to relativistic dynamics [ 1213 ]. Farrelly and Short studied the causal evolution of a single particle in discrete spacetime [ 14 ].