 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / August 2008Archimedes Plutonium's Superconductor Experiment Challenge ; new textbook: "How Superconductivity really works; nanosecond Capacitor discharge current"
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote: > plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote: > > Last time I did these experiments I used only a Wimshurst, but now am > > using both. Using a Van de Graaff more often > > I have metal coil lathe shavings of iron and magnetized several and > > tied a dental-floss string to one > > which was magnetized over 12 hours ago. Tested its "slight magnetism" > > with an unmagnetized shaving. > > The weight of this shaving with string was so small that my scale of > > 1/10 gram could not weigh it. > > So will have to build a balancing beam capable of measuring the weight > > of the iron shaving. > > The length of the iron shaving is approx 3.5 cm. and its diameter > > approx 0.7 cm. > > Operated both the Wimshurst and VandeGraaf and then placed a compass- > > needle at the north-pole of > > the electrode (largest electrode on VandeGraaf) and again noticed the > > deflection of the needle 90 degrees. > > Operated both machines again to fill capacitors. Now while in > > operation, hung the iron-shaving attached > > to the dental-floss at the north-pole of the large electrode on the > > VandeGraaf and as expected it > > acted as a ideal-diamagnet or the Meissner Effect. However, the iron > > shaving at the equator of the > > VandeGraaf was attracted as well as my hair on my arms was attracted. > > As for the Wimshurst, at the pole of either of the electrodes the > > Meissner > > effect occurred. > > And finally on the northpole of the capacitors of the Wimshurst > > displayed a Meissner Effect > > on the iron-shaving. > > So here again, in August a repeating of my experimentation in March of > > 2008, that I again achieve > > a Meissner Effect from Capacitor-Current of both VandeGraaff and > > Wimshurst generators. > > I challenge anyone to duplicate the results. > > P.S. this is not Lenz's law as one mistaken responder opined, for he > > could have said that > > all Meissner tests are Lenz's law under such a mistake. > Did some measuring tonight for the actual deflection of a Meissner > Effect. These measurements > were done on the north-pole of the electrodes on both generators. > Uncharged Wimshurst: one electrode northpole repelled (sic) the iron coil > whilst the other attracted. I am still > trying to explain this attraction as perhaps an induced attraction. > Will try it again tomorrow night. Uncharged Van De Graaff: The large electrode of VandeGraaf repells the iron coil. Whilst the smaller electrode attracted. So I have conformity in both VandeGraaff and Wimshurst uncharged. > Charged Wimshurst: Both electrodes repelled the iron coil shaving and > the size of the deflection was > equal to the distance of the electrode gap and was 2 cm approx. > Charged VandeGraaff: Both electrodes repelled the iron coil shaving > and the large electrode deflection > was 7 cm, the size of the gap between the two electrodes. The small > electrode deflected the coil also > but its deflection was approx 3 cm (and a trouble here is to separate > out the influence of the large > electrode from the measure.) > So here I suspect is evidence of a Meissner Effect upon Wimshurst and > Van de Graaff generators, > both would be room temperature superconductors. > And this whole experiment plays into the idea that cold temperature > superconductors are merely > the transforming of materials to act as Capacitors. So mercury at 4 > Kelvin or the perovskite superconductors > at 35 K or 90 K were merely acting as the capacitors of a Wimshurst > Generator as electricity flow > from an outside source is the flow of electricity between my > electrodes of my generators. > So as chemists and physicists find new materials that are > superconductors, what they merely are doing > is finding materials that are Capacitors. > So, according to my theory, even the Sun and stars have superconductor > currents running in their > plasmas, since all that is needed is a capacitor. And every time we > view a lightning bolt here on > Earth, we witness a superconductor current where the clouds and ground > were capacitors. > So the phenomenon of "Ball Lightning" was probably the worlds first > view of the Meissner Effect, provided > all or part of my above is correct. What this Experiment is designed to do is show what Superconductivity is really all about, and it is all about Capacitors. When a Capacitor charges up and then discharges, the current it produces is a superconductor current. The reason mercury at 4 Kelvin is superconductive is because at that temperature mercury atoms become arranged to be a capacitor. So when you have electric current of DC flowing into a capacitor such as mercury at 4 Kelvin the mercury atoms build up a current and in nanoseconds discharge that current. So superconductivity is simply a Capacitor Current. Before in physics, we had only two types of currents-- AC and DC. Nowadays, with this experiment we obviously have more than two types of currents in the world. We have a Capacitor Current. Lightning bolt strikes are a Capacitor Current. I call capacitor currents as CC. How does Capacitor Currents explain (i) zero resistance and (ii) Meissner Effect? Easy answers to both. The zero resistance is simply the fact of Conservation of Energy. That energy in is equal to energy out. The Meissner Effect is also easy to explain as ideal- diamagnetism of a exclusion of magnetic field. As in the above uncharged VandeGraaff and uncharged Wimshurst repell the magnetic coil. My old Freshman Physics textbook by Halliday and Resnick, 3rd edition 1988 defines electric current and where AC and DC are within the bounds of that definition. However, that definition of current in physics is outdated. The new definition of current in physics needs to be expanded so that it includes this third type of current called Capacitor Current, or CC. So physics has DC, and AC, and CC The experiment I am performing for these past year has all been posted to the Internet sci newsgroups and can easily be performed by others to confirm the truth of the particulars. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com wrote, On 8/14/2008 3:39 PM: > <snip> > this third type of current called Capacitor Current, or CC. So physics [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Yawn...  SignaturePaul D Oosterhout I work for SAIC (but I don't speak for SAIC) > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Welcome back to this group (sci.energy). I look forward to some fantastic new entertainment. Graham >> Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > Welcome back to this group (sci.energy). > > I look forward to some fantastic new entertainment. Does he have some sort of confusion about Cooper pairs, or is he just tilting windmills again? --Damon. who is confused about a lot of things, two > Does he have some sort of confusion about Cooper pairs, or is > he just tilting windmills again? > > --Damon. who is confused about a lot of things, two What is the separation distance in millimeters for the electrodes of your Wimshurst and VandeGraaff generators as the current flows through? > > plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Does he have some sort of confusion about Cooper pairs, or is > he just tilting windmills again? To be confused he would have to have some idea what he's going on about in the first place hence probably windmills. Graham |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.