sci.physics.electromag

The problem with understanding permanent magnets is our perception of the
magnetic field. I think it is a pure cunard, a misunderstood lie.

A permanent magnet has an electrical field, and it is tangential to a bar
magnet. The CW or CCW field as experienced by target (ferromagnetic
material) Look closly, Ampere taught us that. When anything is affected by
that electrical field, it experiences a re-direction of inertia This
re-direction of inertia appears to us as force field acting on the magnets
and we call that force field a magnetic field.In the absence of the target
substance, there is no magnetic function other than the tangential electric
field. When the electric field causes a redirection of inertia of a
electrical charge in motion, I call this a dynamic electrical field.

If you wish to see the dynamic electrical field having a tangential posture,
I suggest you place a bar magnet on the face of a crt.
move the magnet and observe how the electron beam is re-distributed as the
electron beam experiences a re-direction of inertia. After that go back and
study Ampere again. Regards, Lee Pugh, DISIDENT.

Bill Mller" wrote in message
news:aJVCj.24673$cQ1.6014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The title of the post pretty much says it all.
>
c The participants of this list seem to have fairly clear agreement that the
> primary *cause* of magnetic fields is the motion of charges.
>
> With a few hold-outs, most folks seem to (finally) understand that an E
> field does not *cause* an H field. (Those that disagree: p-l-e-a-s-e read
> Jefimenko's "Causality" before jumping in to dispute this statement.)
>
> OK. So far, so good.
>
> A permanent magnet has associated with it a magnetic field whose
> characteristics seem to be indistinguishable from those of a magnetic
field
> that is caused by the motion of charges.
>
> Where the H--- does the H come from? How do we know?
>
> Bill
>
>