Faradaic Activity in Dental Amalgams

Keith has been banging the same old tired drum for the last five years and he doesn't even understand how little his posts have to do with
Faraday's Law, Gauss' Law or Maxwell's corresponding equations...
FWIW, in layman's terms, Faraday's Law: "Any change in the magnetic environment of a coil of wire will cause a voltage (emf) to be "induced" in the coil. No matter how the change is produced, the voltage will be generated. The change could be produced by changing the magnetic field strength, moving a magnet toward or away from the coil, moving the coil into or out of the magnetic field, rotating the coil relative to the magnet, etc. "
All this reminds me of the old Gilligan's Island episode where Gilligan's mouth turned into a radio...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Keith makes Gilligan look like a genius.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Lithium Carbonate (600mg X2 per day) degausses amalgam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

New keyboard again. I had to read it twice - absolutely perfect!!
carabelli
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Same keyboard, but thanks anyway :*)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"New keyboard" means what ever beverage I had at the moment, coffee, water, pick your adult beverage - got spewed on the keyboard because I was laughing so hard.
A Kansas euphemism :-)
Thanks for the laugh
carabelli
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm just wondering how many people are going to admit to probing themselves with an Ohm meter...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

is that what keith is trying to do? get people to probe themselves??
i was beginning to think he was looking for an alternate energy source in amalgam to solve the energy crisis!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

amalgam to solve the energy crisis!
Depending on the amount of coronal discharge; he can rent himself out as a human disco ball.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

yes, it's real funny.
Stay in denial
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Even when he was alive.
carabelli
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Keith has been banging the same old tired drum for the last five years | and he doesn't even understand how little his posts have to do with | Faraday's Law, Gauss' Law or Maxwell's corresponding equations... | | FWIW, in layman's terms, Faraday's Law: | "Any change in the magnetic environment of a coil of wire will cause a | voltage (emf) to be "induced" in the coil. No matter how the change is | produced, the voltage will be generated. The change could be produced | by changing the magnetic field strength, moving a magnet toward or away | from the coil, moving the coil into or out of the magnetic field, | rotating the coil relative to the magnet, etc. "
And of course moving the magnet is changing the strength of the field in the vicinity of the conductor, as is moving the conductor through the field.
Einstein began his 1905 paper with: "It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamics--as usually understood at the present time--when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example, the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other of these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric field with a certain definite energy, producing a current at the places where parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric field arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet. In the conductor, however, we find an electromotive force, to which in itself there is no corresponding energy, but which gives rise--assuming equality of relative motion in the two cases discussed--to electric currents of the same path and intensity as those produced by the electric forces in the former case."
Unfortunately he soon forgot it and went on with some rubbish about
[quote] we establish by definition that the "time" required by a turtle to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel from B to A. [end quote] Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www /
[quote] For velocities greater than that of a turtle our deliberations become meaningless; we shall, however, find in what follows, that the velocity of a turtle in our theory plays the part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity. [quote] Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www /
Einstein can "prove" (ha ha) nothing can go faster than a turtle.
Oops!... Did I say 'a turtle'? Sorry...'light'.
We are still stuck with "It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamics--as usually understood at the present time--when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena." because the huckster claims
"VII. The Apparent Incompatibility of the Law of Propagation of Light with the Principle of Relativity THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which light is propagated in empty space. " --Albert Huckster Einstein
Hardly a simpler law than the Principle of Relativity, and there is NO law of propagation of light at one speed except Einstein's insistence on it.
Apparently he thinks you'll get more voltage by moving the conductor than you will by moving the magnet.
Androcles.
| All this reminds me of the old Gilligan's Island episode where | Gilligan's mouth turned into a radio...
Yep... stupidity.
Androcles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So you are saying that amalgams are more dangerous inside a moving train?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

To say nothing of the patient moving through the Earth's magnetic field...
SP
--
Take out the TRASH to reply

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:27:39 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.ca (Stovepipe) wrote:

Good point. I just got scared and went downstairs and removed all the magnets from the front of my refrigerator and tossed them in the trash. Does anyone know whether they are considered hazardous waste?
Joel
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Here is a thought experiment. take a square conducting loop. Inside a fluctating magnetic field is applied as found in a power generator capable of producting 2000V or more and transmitting a large amount of power through the loop, to say a power line.
Now replace the square conductor with a plastic one, and in addition rotate the plastic conductor at a high rate of speed in and out of the magnetic field.
Theoretically a fluctating magnetic field will induce an electric field and thus a "voltage" in space or any moving loop. Why doesn't the plastic conductor burn up with all the electric energy generated by the magnetic field, which normally would have been transmitted by the "conducting loop".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What do you mean "thought experiment?" A number of posters conduct this kind of inquiry three, maybe four times a day right in their bedrooms .......
Joel

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joel M. Eichen wrote:

Thus, Faraday's law implies that the line integral of the electric field around circuit (in the positive direction) is equal to minus the time rate of change of the magnetic flux linking this circuit. Does this law just apply to conducting circuits, or can we apply it to an arbitrary closed loop in space? Well, the difference between a conducting circuit and an arbitrary closed loop is that electric current can flow around a circuit, whereas current cannot, in general, flow around an arbitrary loop. In fact, the emf induced around a conducting circuit drives a current around that circuit, where is the resistance of the circuit. However, we can make this resistance arbitrarily large without invalidating Eq. (7.13). In the limit in which tends to infinity, no current flows around the circuit, so the circuit becomes indistinguishable from an arbitrary loop. Since we can place such a circuit anywhere in space, and Eq. (7.13) still holds, we are forced to the conclusion that Eq. (7.13) is valid for any closed loop in space, and not just for conducting circuits. Equation (7.13) describes how a time varying magnetic field generates an electric field which fills space. The strength of the electric field is directly proportional to the rate of change of the magnetic field. The field lines associated with this electric field form loops in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic field. If the magnetic field is increasing then the electric field lines circulate in the opposite sense to the fingers of my right-hand, when the thumb of my right-hand points in the direction of the field. If the magnetic field is decreasing then the electric field lines circulate in the same sense as the fingers of my right-hand, when the thumb of my right-hand points in the direction of the field. This is illustrated in the diagram below.
We can now appreciate that when a conducting circuit is placed in a time varying magnetic field, it is the electric field induced by the changing magnetic field which gives rise to the emf around the circuit. If the loop has a finite resistance then this electric field also drives a current around the circuit. Note, however, that the electric field is generated irrespective of the presence of a conducting circuit.
----------------------------
So if I took a loop of say plastic and rotated it in a strong magnetic field, like is done with conducting loops in power stations to generate current why wouldn't the plastic loop heat up from the induced voltage. Or would it?
In such a case you should avoid spinning near magnetic fields, because you might spontaneosuly combust!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Plastic will not conduct because of its molecular valance. That's why they use some plastics as insulators.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

...and silicon as semi-conductors .......
Who knows what Bakelite is?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.