New Test of J.Nordberg's 'Field Reversing Sphere' Experiment

You two are talking about different dividing lines (more correctly, planes). He's talking about a N-S dividing plane (the Equator), you are talking about E-W dividing plane (the one that passes through meridian zero). The first doesn't exist (though Nordberg "detected" it), while the second one is obviously true.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, I agree to that. We know Mr. Nordberg placed his compasses on opposite sides of the hypothetical N-S dividing plane, in an effort to test its existence. I was speculating whether Mr. Nordberg had also inadvertently placed his compasses on opposite sides of the E-W dividing plane. If he had done so, he might have drawn the incorrect conclusion that the compass deflections were evidence of the non-existent N-S dividing plane, without giving a second thought to the E-W dividing plane. He would have to be a rather poor experimenter to do that, but I guess that would be better than being a fraud.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The suspense is killing me!! ARGH!!! lol

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

His video shows only the N-S partition.

 

Yes, I just watched again and it seems you are correct. Both of the compasses are on the "far" side of their respective transparent shelves. Last time I watched it, I thought the bottom compass was closer to the "near" side of its transparent shelf.

 

This is the correct side for detecting maximum effect.

 

I agree entirely with Tach's responses in #261, #264, #266. You had imo defined your 'dividing line' as that where compass deflection sense reverses. Local axial symmetry of Nordberg's setup (i.e. in the vicinity of sphere and attached straight wire parts) precludes one from existing. And further, only difference that would be noticed by placing compasses on opposite sides of the E-W dividing plane you refer to (Nordberg speak: inside or outside of loop), is that strength of compass deflections would be unequal. Greater inside loop than outside. But still both needle deflections either clockwise OR both anticlockwise, depending on current sign.

IN #263: "The suspense is killing me!! ARGH!!! lol"

Let's hope the inevitable letdown doesn't prove fatal either. :bugeye:

 

I ain't a' scared. lol

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So, why is it taking so long for RJBeery to post his results? Probably because they overturn all of physics as we know it! Deep down, you know it might be true.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

One should not rush in downing a whole bottle of consolation whisky. Only kidding - I'm sure RJB is just being thorough in this scientific endeavor.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Settle down, kids. I apologize for this taking me basically a full week; the original setup was over-engineered, and my schedule gives me only a small window of "me time" in the evenings. I'll post a video shortly.

 

OK, the video is horrible, shaky, and out of focus but we're still getting science done.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[video=youtube;WbuL-vKEegY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbuL-vKEegY&feature=youtu.be[/video]

Spoiler

The results are clear: the increase in area flux does not affect the direction of the magnetic field "curl". Either Nordberg is a complete charlatan or he has inadvertently made an error in his experiment setup (which is frankly difficult for me to believe).

In any event, Q-reeus, I owe you $50 so if you'd like to email me your banking account info I'll follow through. My address is rjbeery@gmail.com. CONGRATS, it was a fun experience

 

Nice work!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I noticed that the deflection is much less at the "equator", and gets stronger nearer the "poles".

 

Hey thanks for that interesting vid Rhoderick. I appreciate you have been honest all along on this. Now I did say would pay you $50 if there was *any* difference between straight wire case and that with sphere substituted. So you may wish to perform a more rigorous check and mount that compass on a stand and accurately as can measure deflections at fixed radius from wire just to confirm. We have however enough here to unequivocally expose Nordberg as a charlatan, and the fact those compasses in his demo never did point the same way is a giveaway methinks (hidden iron somewhere, or such).

 

But did you not also notice compass was nearer to wire in the 'poles' cases? What does Biot-Savart relation say about that? Oh yes!

 

The setup is very shoddy, that's why. The compasses need to be stacked ALIGNED vertically on a non-magnetic shelf , not moved around by hand.

 

I'm not sure the deflection is less at the equator due to the setup. Doesn't standard theory predict the deflection to be less at the equator, as Q-reeus is pointing out?

 

Just to clarify. Theory, here meaning use of Biot-Savart law, says that compass will deflect equally for equal radial separation from wire (or sphere axis), sphere there or not. And proviso rest of loop is large enough to ignore it's effect. One thing Nordberg advised on that is relevant - measure with loop facing away from compass(s).

 

So the math predicts that.

Oh yes. Shouldn't be too difficult for RJ to test it out.

 

No, where did you get the idea?