Why Miles Mathis is wrong!

[Armand]

Just think of the sine wave as a corkscrew running down the length of the wire.

http://milesmathis.com/alt.pdf

When an oscilloscope is hooked-up to an AC circuit, the current is displayed on the screen as a sine wave; not a corkscrew. If the sine wave were actually rotating in a corkscrew motion as it travels down the length of the wire, as Mathis contends, the rotation would show up on the oscilloscope display; but it doesn’t. So the Mathis theory conflicts with all known experimental data.

For the record...

An oscilloscope displays voltage in the vertical axis (not current) and time in the horizontal axis...

Early Oscilloscope Displaying Sine Wave

And a sine wave is simply a 2D representation of a circular motion over time.

3D Spiral Motion Displayed as a 2D Sine Wave

So a sine wave is exactly how a corkscrew motion would be displayed on an oscilloscope...

If you must fight, at least fight fair... Cheers...

[David]

It is very easy to display the current on an oscilloscope; it's done all time. Just attach a current probe to the circuit, and feed the output of the probe into the input of oscilloscope.

Is that fair enough?

[Armand]

It is very easy to display the current on an oscilloscope; it's done all time. Just attach a current probe to the circuit, and feed the output of the probe into the input of oscilloscope.

Is that fair enough?

A current probe converts the magnetic field around a wire into a voltage that is displayed by the oscilloscope.

All electrical currents are indirectly measured in this way...

Oscilloscopes display voltages - that is why the knob on the panel says 'volts per division'.

Did you use a current probe in your measurement?


Most people don't, because it requires that they completely expose the wire/conductor...

And none of this has anything to do with sine waves...

[JeffreyW]

Thanks but my question wasn't about how motors or generators work. It was about Mathis' assertion that AC cannot possibly be a back-and-forth motion of electrons, that a back-and-forth motion of anything cannot transfer energy from one place to another. Consider sound. A wine glass can quite easily be shattered by feeding it a sound wave corresponding to the glass's resonant frequency. How would this be possible, if the back-and-forth motion of air molecules (or electrons or anything else) resulted in zero net energy transfer?

To me it's an Occam's razor thing. Oscillating electrons, as a perfect analog for oscillating air molecules, is the simplest explanation for the conveyance of energy via AC. It doesn't require corkscrew motion, stacked spins, ions being flung about, the Miles Mathis charge field and/or "charge recycling," or worst of all, "anti-photons." As is typical, Mathis claims his explanation is simpler than the mainstream explanation, when in fact it's far more convoluted.

It has everything to do with how generators and motors work.

A generator takes an oscillating mechanical force and transforms it into oscillating electrical energy.

A motor takes an oscillating electrical energy and transforms it into oscillating mechanical force.

The point is that it can be explained without electrons. It is a macroscale phenomenon. Electricity is like water, you don't need to count the molecules (electrons) to do calculations.

[David]

Armand,

I have an AC current probe with its own graphic display. However, the output of the probe can also be fed to an oscilloscope for display. This sort of thing is done all the time. What exactly are you disputing?

[Armand]

Armand,

I have an AC current probe with its own graphic display. However, the output of the probe can also be fed to an oscilloscope for display. This sort of thing is done all the time. What exactly are you disputing?

The assertion that...

...as Mathis contends, the (corkscrew) rotation would show up on the oscilloscope display (as a sine wave); but it doesn’t.

Q: What pattern (i.e. wave form) would you expect to see, if not a sine wave?

A Standard Corkscrew...

3D Sprial Displayed (Projected) as a 2D Sine Wave

Understand, I'm just clarifying the functionality of an oscilloscope (to display a wave form in general)...

[David]

Armand,

Mathis is claiming that the AC current is flowing in one direction, and one direction only. However, if that was true, the sine wave (or corkscrew) would be displayed above the horizontal axis and would never dip below it. But that isn't the case. The current is alternating (changing direction), and does dip below the horizontal axis.

[Armand]

Armand,

Mathis is claiming that the AC current is flowing in one direction, and one direction only. However, if that was true, the sine wave would be displayed above the horizontal axis and would never dip below it. But that isn't the case. The current is alternating (changing direction), and does dip below the horizontal axis.

Beyond the scope (pun intended) of my understanding (of MM's Theories)... Standing down...

Cheers...
-Armand

[seasmith]

I clearly have no business posting on this thread, but if one might proffer a minor corrigido in terms.

The current is alternating (changing direction), and does dip below the horizontal axis. - David

Nosir, the AC current is not changing directions, the interleaving phases are.
It's a subtle distinction between AC and pulsed DC: "alternating current" is in a sense, a reflection in a bounding circuit (much like an optical wave conjugate), as opposed to pulsations of DC which must go back and forth.
In current terminology, AC would be equivalent to an electric 'standing wave', also colloquially misnomered as 'scalar' emission.

~

[Chromium6]

It has everything to do with how generators and motors work.

A generator takes an oscillating mechanical force and transforms it into oscillating electrical energy.

A motor takes an oscillating electrical energy and transforms it into oscillating mechanical force.

The point is that it can be explained without electrons. It is a macroscale phenomenon. Electricity is like water, you don't need to count the molecules (electrons) to do calculations.

Well, this experiment proves your underlined description as completely wrong. Doesn't it?
------

Static Electricity Defies Simple Explanation
...
If equal numbers of electrons hopped in both directions, nothing much would change. But that's where the size difference comes in. As Lowell and Truscott explained it, only one point of the sphere touches the plane, and it has just a few electrons to give and a larger number of empty states with which to absorb them. In contrast, a larger streak of the plane comes in contact with the sphere, so it has plenty of electrons to give. So more electrons hop from plane to sphere than vice versa, leaving the sphere negatively charged and the plane positively charged and creating the static. Other researchers showed how the theory could apply to grains of two different sizes.

Unfortunately, the theory doesn't work, report Heinrich Jaeger, a physicist at the University of Chicago in Illinois, and colleagues. They mixed grains of insulating zirconium dioxide-silicate with diameters of 251 micrometers and 326 micrometers and dropped them through a horizontal electric field, which pushed positively charged particles one way and negatively charged particles the other. They tracked tens of thousands of particles—by dropping an $85,000 high-speed camera alongside them. (See video above.) Sure enough, the smaller ones tended to be charged negatively and the larger ones positively, each accumulating 2 million charges on average.

Then the researchers probed whether those charges could come from electrons already trapped on the grains' surfaces. They gently heated fresh grains to liberate the trapped electrons and let them "relax" back into less energetic states. As an electron undergoes such a transition, it emits a photon. So by counting photons, the researchers could tally the trapped electrons. "It's pretty amazing to me that they count every electron on a particle," Shinbrot says.

The tally showed that the beads start out with far too few trapped electrons to explain the static buildup, Jaeger says. In fact, even if the researchers try to make trapped electrons boil up to the surface by exposing the grains to light, the density of trapped electrons remains less than 1/100,000 of what would be needed to explain the effect, the researchers report in a paper in press at Physical Review Letters.

"They show pretty convincingly that the idea of the transfer of these trapped electrons is not valid," says Daniel Lacks, a chemical engineer at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, who applied the Lowell and Truscott theory to granular materials.

If the grains aren't swapping electrons, then where do the charges come from?

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 10&t=15057

[Sparky]

The folks on this forum seem to know a thing or two about electricity. Does anyone agree with Mathis' recent assessment of alternating current -- that there is no current in alternating current, because the + and – phases of the cycle cancel, resulting in zero net current? That seemed a little strange to me. "The electrons would have to go back and forth as well, sort of wobbling in place. How is energy transferred down a line that way?"

http://milesmathis.com/alt.pdf

After being taught that electric current was electrons, and coming to TB to find all sorts of perspectives, I am still not able to explain current. But, my understanding of electricity has evolved, and I now see that Tom Beardin can explain, with math models that I don't understand, a deeper understanding of electricity . http://www.cheniere.org/misc/flaws_in_c ... theory.htm

I think quantum mechanics has some valuable perspectives that open up areas that need to be considered. As far as I know, MM does not go down that road.

My vague understanding now is that AC current is a one way deal. It is pulsed, but tends to move in one direction. Whatever is generating the AC is producing dipoles, which allow broken symmetry and the resulting extraction of vacuum energy /electric current. http://www.cheniere.org/references/brokensymmetry.htm

[Armand]

What exactly is an Electric Current? Good question...

I have always been fascinated by Netwon's Cradle...



What exactly is it that traverses through the steel balls? (energy? vibration? torsion?)...

I believe a key to the answer will be found in an understanding of soliton waves...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soliton_wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine-Gordon_equation

I suspect there is a strong connection between soliton waves and the nature of electric current...

I have found the work of Oliver Heaviside, Charles Steinmetz, Gabriel Kron and Eric Dollard (among others) to be very helpful along these lines...

And, of course, as study of solitons...

Cheers...
-Armand

[David]

PRESS RELEASE:
(8/07/2012)

Internationally recognized artist Miles Mathis has a scientific paper being published this month by the journal of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. AIG is the leading professional institute representing geoscientists in all professional sectors throughout Australia. The subject of the paper is plate tectonics or continental drift, in which Mathis proposes charge as the hidden mechanism.

Many are calling this recent publication unprecedented, not only because Mathis has long been known as a figure painter/[ballet dancer*], but because he was invited by the journal's editor to publish his work. Normally, authors must submit to professional journals, they must be working in the field or in academia, and they must pay for publication through their university or other institution. In this case, those requirements were waived. Louis Hissink, the editor of AIG News, explains that he wished to publish Mathis' paper to coincide with the 34th International Geological Congress being held in Brisbane, Australia.

Artist Moonlights as Physicist
http://mileswmathis.com/moonlights.pdf

When contacted for comment, Louis Hissink (editor of AIG News), stated that his organization has never published a Mathis paper; nor do they ever expect to anytime in the future.

Now this doesn’t exactly qualify as an error in the Mathis theories per se, but does shed light on the veracity of his claims.

* (not in the original press release)

[Chromium6]

He expects better:

PRESS RELEASE:
(8/07/2012)

Internationally recognized artist Miles Mathis has a scientific paper being published this month by the journal of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. AIG is the leading professional institute representing geoscientists in all professional sectors throughout Australia. The subject of the paper is plate tectonics or continental drift, in which Mathis proposes charge as the hidden mechanism.

Many are calling this recent publication unprecedented, not only because Mathis has long been known as a figure painter/[ballet dancer*], but because he was invited by the journal's editor to publish his work. Normally, authors must submit to professional journals, they must be working in the field or in academia, and they must pay for publication through their university or other institution. In this case, those requirements were waived. Louis Hissink, the editor of AIG News, explains that he wished to publish Mathis' paper to coincide with the 34th International Geological Congress being held in Brisbane, Australia.

Artist Moonlights as Physicist
http://mileswmathis.com/moonlights.pdf

When contacted for comment, Louis Hissink (editor of AIG News), stated that his organization has never published a Mathis paper; nor do they ever expect to anytime in the future.

Now this doesn’t exactly qualify as an error in the Mathis theories per se, but does shed light on the veracity of his claims. * (not in the original press release)

Looks like another Ice-ager theory site:

http://fgservices1947.wordpress.com/

https://fgservices1947.wordpress.com/20 ... -problems/

Hook'em!!!

Pretty much posting his own theories:

Louis Hissink says:
June 8, 2014 at 10:24 am

Rob,

You can be rest assured I won’t be submitting my musing to any peer-censored journal, so I’ll save on red pencils.

[nick c]

Note:
Louis Hissink is a geologist and free thinker. He has written numerous blogs and articles in support of the Electric Universe. He is well aware of the Thunderbolts project and has exchanged ideas with members of the TB team.
for example:
A Geologist Looks at Valles Marineris . . . . . . Louis Hissink
Comments by Wal Thornhill