What ACTUALLY causes a magnetic field to be generated when there is a current?

[vaibhav1803]

I wish to Quote the multipole theorem, from what brainstorm has said,
thenet mag. field is the result of multiple "multipoles" self aligning in a certain direction causing this "magnetic field" due to moving sets of multipoles and think of it thi way,
suppose u keep an electron near the wire and can deterministcally(just assume) find where it is, u see that it moives with a certain velocity/acceleration now follow the elctron in a fromwhere you see its at rest, what do you see..?
the electrons motion is normal to the wire..which directly implies a "fast moving" electric field which on applying correct frame transforms you will see as the one proposed by biot savart law.
anyone agree...?

 

[brainstorm]

the electrons motion is normal to the wire..which directly implies a "fast moving" electric field which on applying correct frame transforms you will see as the one proposed by biot savart law.
anyone agree...?

What does "normal to the wire" mean? What does "fast moving" mean? In contrast with "slow moving?"

 

[vaibhav1803]

the reply isn't genuine its just a theory I am proposing, i am yet to get down to the transform equations(just out of high school need some time)
normal to wire as in if u released an electron u kept beside the wire, you would observe that the e- in a complex way moves towards the wire, but if u move in a reference frame attached to the electron you see that the motion is only approaching the wire(normal/perpendicular to its length), due to a force occurring as a combined effect of various microfields in the wire which when correctly transformed gives you the magnetic force. that's what i propose

 

[DeShark]

I wish to Quote the multipole theorem, from what brainstorm has said,
thenet mag. field is the result of multiple "multipoles" self aligning in a certain direction causing this "magnetic field" due to moving sets of multipoles and think of it thi way,
suppose u keep an electron near the wire and can deterministcally(just assume) find where it is, u see that it moives with a certain velocity/acceleration now follow the elctron in a fromwhere you see its at rest, what do you see..?
the electrons motion is normal to the wire..which directly implies a "fast moving" electric field which on applying correct frame transforms you will see as the one proposed by biot savart law.
anyone agree...?

"u" "thi" "deterministcally" "elctron" "fromwhere" "moives" "thenet" "mag." all crop up in my spellchecker as incorrect. I actually cannot read this.

In a reference frame in which the electron is at rest, it doesn't move normal to the wire. It is at rest, by definition. Electric fields don't move. If you're going to quote a theorem, it should be a well-known one. A search for "multipole theorem" in google returns about 19 results, this thread is the third one.

I don't want to put you off doing physics or contributing to this board, but please run your posts through a spellchecker and read over them before submitting them. There's an edit button too in case you make a mistake and notice it later.

 

[DeShark]

the reply isn't genuine its just a theory I am proposing, i am yet to get down to the transform equations(just out of high school need some time)
normal to wire as in if u released an electron u kept beside the wire, you would observe that the e- in a complex way moves towards the wire, but if u move in a reference frame attached to the electron you see that the motion is only approaching the wire(normal/perpendicular to its length), due to a force occurring as a combined effect of various microfields in the wire which when correctly transformed gives you the magnetic force. that's what i propose

Lorentz transformations can also be used to prove that magnetic and electric fields are simply different aspects of the same force — the electromagnetic force. If we have one charge or a collection of charges which are all stationary with respect to each other, we can observe the system in a frame in which there is no motion of the charges. In this frame, there is only an "electric field". If we switch to a moving frame, the Lorentz transformation will predict that a "magnetic field" is present. This field was initially unified in Maxwell's concept of the "electromagnetic field".

The theory I think you're driving at has already been proposed by Maxwell and taken further by Einstein. You should take a look at them both (maxwell's equations and einstein's special relativity), since they're both incredible feats of the mind; really inspirational.

 

[vaibhav1803]

"u" "thi" "deterministcally" "elctron" "fromwhere" "moives" "thenet" "mag." all crop up in my spellchecker as incorrect. I actually cannot read this.

In a reference frame in which the electron is at rest, it doesn't move normal to the wire. It is at rest, by definition. Electric fields don't move. If you're going to quote a theorem, it should be a well-known one. A search for "multipole theorem" in google returns about 19 results, this thread is the third one.

I don't want to put you off doing physics or contributing to this board, but please run your posts through a spellchecker and read over them before submitting them. There's an edit button too in case you make a mistake and notice it later.

Ah yes, my apologies ,its that i get a bit excited when a of ideas cross my mind(which it did in this thread), which shows up as you tried to read, spellchecker, well let me handle that part,
well the "multipole theorem" is just an idea I am proposing of how to think of the beginning of a mag. field, nothing more nothing less, that instead of 1e- roaming around we have packets of e- buzzing within the wire,im still workin on the math, no I'm not going to see any papers till i really need them, i usually don't refer to the literature, becuse its cheating in the game that i play.
as far the reference frame goes, don't be so skeptical, it was meant to be said the the wire approaches the e- normal to its own length.
as far as putting me off physics goes, fella u can't even come close to it, science the love of my life, and better not mess in that area.

incase you sincerely can't figure out, e- is being use to replace electron in writing, i don't hope u need this. X}

 

[ireland01]

Here's a question for you: Why is there SOMETHING and not NOTHING? Think about it!