ith the authors of this page or responsible for its content.
MAGNETIC FIELDS SURROUNDING CONDUCTORS Bert Schreiber 4519 Holly St. Bellaire, TX 77401-5802 charlesbert_99@yahoo.com

MAGNETIC FIELDS SURROUNDING CONDUCTORS

Bert Schreiber
4519 Holly St.
Bellaire, TX 77401-5802
charlesbert_99@yahoo.com

OPENING:

As a requirement to study and then receive a degree in Electrical Engineering, there is required a course
in physics. The first thing in their first class the EE students are informed is to forget what you were
taught about electricity and magnetism in physics as most of it is wrong. But that is only part of the
problems.

There are words used in both physics and in EE that are not only wrong, or incorrect , or misleading, but
many entities there were given mathematical signs that causes yet further misunderstandings and
impossibilities. It is not the purpose of this paper to give all of these as a few of the more important will
be shown as this discourse is expanded. The only comment is; neither of these disciplines will change
anything even when they know they are wrong nor will they get together and make all of the corrections
and start all over. It is the students and truthful science that lose.

For brevity, only the last names of the scientists involved are given. They should be known to the
readers. There is given at the end the usual references. Only the fundamental information will be given.
There are NOTES that will reference these specific books by page numbers and to others involved. It is
recommended that the reader stop and read the referenced NOTE before proceeding.

What this paper is all about are the unbelievable errors, omissions, falsities etc. that are now shown in
textbooks and references for physics. Those that are in the EE texts or might be are so noted when
applicable. See NOTE [1]

SPECIAL NOTICE:

The magnetic field of the Earth is the chosen human frame of reference against which all of the
magnetic phenomena were compared to. This made such relative and not absolute. This resulted in that
what is called the N pole of a second magnet is actually emitting its opposite field and likewise for the S
pole. And as usual, the scientists based the distinction on the visual effect and not on reality or
backwards. That is, a magnet used in the compass should have had its pole that pointed to the N of the
Earth marked S as unlike poles attract. Instead it was marked N and remains to this day. For practical
purposes then anything written as to magnetic phenomena is actually backwards but is not incorrect to
the Earths poles frame of reference. It will be shown later that the created poles are not relative but
absolute.

1: WHERE IT ALL STARTED

From the previous study of electrostatics, though unfortunately it was not wholly true but close enough,
that there were two kinds of electricity that were named from their source effect vitreous and resinous.
2
Franklin from his study of electrostatics determined that there were not two different kinds of electricity,
but only one with two effects. His first double mistake was to designate the two effects as positive and
negative and assigned a mathematical sign to same. It is unfortunate he did not use V and R even if that
was a stretch of the imagination. His next and biggest mistake as he had a 50-50 chance on this one, that
this one kind flowed (moved) from positive to negative. From that point on the study of moving electric
charges became downhill and has resulted in the near total garbage taught for over a hundred years
about electricity and induced magnetism due to electric currents in conductors in physics.

This will have to be discussed in further detail later, but for the present, the flow of electrons from the
source is the negative terminal, output, to the positive terminal, input. This causes confusion as in almost
all of the textbooks so referenced, only the input current as i is shown and NOT which direct current
source terminal. Hence, if they are following tradition, the source is positive and some of the
illustrations are in error. If they are using the correct source as negative, then some are correct. Hence,
the scientists for all theoretical purposes have bypassed reality 100% by giving only the end results,
without having to commit (cowards) to either the falsity or the truth. The author assumes herein that they
were using the positive source as the input current or practice what they preach.

2: THE CRUCIAL DISCOVERY

Prior to 1831 there was another known of two different kinds of electricity effect electrostatic (static)
and moving. The moving was done when the static source was sent through a conductor like a wet string
or the human body. The static form could be stored in the Leyden jar and rapidly discharged. The
behavior of magnets had been known from antiquity and many experiments (independently done) had
shown that a magnet had two poles. A bar magnet or a sphere, was such that one of the poles turned to
magnetic North of the Earths field and one the magnetic South. These field lines directions were what
is equivalent to the reference longitude lines of the Earth, i.e., great circles passing through the magnetic
poles. It was arbitrary that the pole that pointed to N was named the north seeking pole and became just
the N pole eventually. Many suspected that there was probably some direct connection between
electricity and magnetism.

In 1831 Oersted discovered that a straight conductor (here on in a wire may be used) caused the needle
of a compass (needle here on in with the N pole normally painted black) to be deflected by the current in
the wire. This then showed the connection between moving electricity, not static electricity, and
magnetism. It is from this fundamental discovery that all the present behavior of batteries and
conductors is derived and the entire electrical power system. It was Volta who made the first bimetallic
battery so to speak that gave a useable controlled continuous direct current.

A diligent search of the references did not immediately find Oersteds actual experiment. It was only
mentioned like an afterthought. Then the author used Reference 1. that was his college textbook and
found it on page 389. There was one thing wrong. The text explanation did not match the illustration. A
quick search on the web resulted in a dead end for all practical purposes.

Then the author started looking in all of the references, those which had an illustration and discovered
that for the most part, the illustrations did not have any input or N and S poles likewise, especially for
solenoids. See NOTE [2]

Then the author became very suspicious as to why not the direct current source, the input current, and
the N and S poles not shown but only the verbiage end results? Something was wrong somewhere. Sic:
Sherlock Holmes and the dog not barking.

3
But, the most glaring lie by omission was; in NONE of the references was there mentioned in which
direction was a coil wound and that included a single coil or a loop.

Figure 1


Figure 2 (a)





Figure 2 (b)








The field within a long solenoid is uniform;







outside it is essentially zero.








Credit: Figure 1, 2 (a) Reference 6. Figure 2 (b) Reference 7.

Not being able to find the answers the author decided to perform the experiment (or close there to) that
was done by Faraday using a solenoid circa 1833. See NOTE [3]

3: DUPLICATING THE EXPERIMENT

The author reproduced this experiment using a solenoid about 58 cm long and 4.5 cm in diameter that
was the remains of the secondary of a Tesla coil the author built probably 40 years ago. The power
supply was a D dry cell battery in a holder underneath the middle parallel to the coil and taped in place.
The entire solenoid and battery was suspended from a string about 130 cm long. The experiment was
performed in the authors work shed that has his laboratory. The apparatus was assembled on September
24, 2006 in the AM and the experiments conducted starting from noon until about 4:00 PM.

Since there are two possibilities as to which terminal to which wire end and which direction the coil is
wound, that gives 4 possibilities. Therefore, using hindsight the negative terminal was considered as the
input. The coil was then wound when one looked at the end in a clockwise direction.
4
One wire from one end was to the positive terminal and the other wire to the negative terminal. Since the
oscillation time was very long, it took about 30 minutes for the solenoid to line up with the Earths
magnetic field. When the apparatus had stabilized, the positive terminal was facing south so that meant
the other end was the N pole and was the negative terminal input, not that as shown in the book
illustration that had it reversed. Therefore, the book illustration w