Hi, If I wound a coil of glass fibers and would like to let her high energy laser beam. Which fields would be generated in the coil and the surrounding area? Thank you.
I do not believe there would be any field formed. I assume you thinking in terms of the magnetic field that is formed when current flows through a coil. Since light is not a charged particle (it is an oscillating EM wave) there would not be a magnetic field.
Thank for reply but... Yes I thought well to.And photon flying near the speed of light in a circular orbits can not create some kind of gravitational effect as the rotating ring? And what of influences would be to spacetime? Thank you.
There would be a gravitational effect according to GR, but it would be _way_ below the threshold of detection. In character, it would be similar to but much weaker than 'frame dragging' due to the Earth's rotation (which hasn't been detected yet either, iirc).
Laser and spacetime Thank veri much for you answer but ... And if this experiment was outside the earth in a vacuum and laser power would be the maximum possible CO2 laser with the maximum possible performance and large number of turns the coil. How would it look like space time? And what a vacuum cavity in the coil? By
It would look very much like the field of a rotating mass ring. What you need to consider is that strength of the field is going to be very weak for the laser/optical fiber system. The reason being the mass energy equivalence. A rotating "mass current" is equal to a c^2 "energy current". You're going to need something like 10^17 "watt-turns" to equal a 1 kg ring at 60 rpm. (Of equal dimensions).
I sense you're trying to do something related to perpetual energy, faster than light propulsion or worm holes. Am I right in this? The answer would be that while any movement of matter or energy alters space-time the gravitational effect from a couple of photons going through fibre optical wiring would be absolutely tiny to be completely unmeasurable. Even if you put a hugely powerful laser at one end you'd melt the glass long before anything gravitational could be measured. Lasers aren't terribly powerful in the sense of energy put through, what makes them powerful is they can concentrate energy into small regions or short bursts. Picowatt lasers are not uncommon but they can only output at that rate for nanoseconds, the total energy they use in that burst would likely be less than your computer is using each second right now. If you wanted to 'funnel' energy around and around in a loop electricity in electrical cabling would allow for much higher sustained power throughput than a laser. Even then you'd melt the cable long before anything really quirky happened to do with electromagnetic fields and even then 'quirky' is little more than standard EM effects seen in things like electromagnets (but rarely in normal cabling, as is required to make them practical for everyday use). If you're attempting to 'invent' some convoluted device based on 'cool' physical principles like lasers, gravitational warping etc which makes infinite energy or a wormhole then I suggest you stop looking up buzzwords for physics you don't understand and instead open a high school physics book and get learning. You'll achieve a lot more doing that than the crackpot nonsense your questions seem to elude to.
Thank very much for your opinion. In fact, I would like to create a small tunnel in spacetime in the direction of movement of the ship. By
Then you should learn a bit of physics, because just blindly and randomly thinking up various configurations is pointless. If all you're doing is finding out physics buzzwords and making stuff up then you're wasting your time.
I don't know. I think scientists need to start dangling a few crackpot "cool" carrots in front of the younger generations. Seems to be the only way to get their faces out of their PSP or cell phone and into a physics book. Yeah, I know, I know...it's dishonest. But have you been to any graduation ceremonies lately? Thousands of English, business and communications degrees, and like 2 engineers and a biologist (usually a marine biologist, because they think dolphins are cute). I exaggerate, but you get the point.
If you want to actually build something which works then you are wasting your time, because without understanding the underlying physics you have no way of knowing what to build and that's assuming what you want to build is even possible. Openning up tears in space, even if it is possible, is not something you're going to be able to do using supplies bought from Home Depot. Speculating on how, in principle, things like space-time warping to make a time machine or a spaceship is not a waste of time, as its those sorts of things which lead to an interest in developing physics. Having no clue about any physics and thinking you have a chance in hell of doing things like space-time tearing or gravity shields (as your other thread asks about) is a waste of time because you never build anything which works and you never learn any physics relevant to it. There's a difference between speculating about the 'cool' ideas and being ignorantly naive thinking you can do the stuff seen in Star Trek with things found at a hardware store. Yes, I have but since as I was at a physics graduation ceremony it was, unsurprisingly, full of physicists. If someone can't be motivated to do physics at university without having to be lied to then physics isn't for them. I agree that more people should have a basic grasp of basic physics, far too many people simply know next to nothing and couldn't pass a high school test if you put one in front of them. However, the drive someone needs to do something more intensively for 3 or 4 years at university is something quite different and lying about things would either push people away or attract in people who then find they have entirely the wrong mindset to do university level physics. If someone isn't willing to sit down and do the boring basics in order to work up to an understanding capable of grasping the more advanced but 'cool' stuff then they should ask why they are even doing the subject in the first place. Cranks show this kind of mindset all the time, they want to talk about curvature and black holes and quantum field theory but they don't want to put in the ground work needed to advance their understanding to the point where they can actually do said physics. People like Reiku and Farsight typify this, they want to talk the talk but they don't want to put in the effort. Hence I'd say physics is not for them.
Thank you for answers. I am studying electrical engineering in college. And there we also had lectures on physics but it was already long ago and since then much has changed. Therefore, are some of my strange questions. By.
