Date: Apr 20, 2013 3:25 AM Author: plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com Subject: does the magnetic current density make for attraction-only?<br> Chapt15.54 Maxwell Eq deriving Darwin Evolution & Superdeterminism #1305 New<br> Physics #1508 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed Alright, I think I am correct on this. What I need is assurance that

the magnetic monopoles are always attractive force so that unlikes

attract and yet also likes attract, wherein electric charge we have

both attraction and repulsion.

So my problem is to find out if the Maxwell Equations with magnetic

monopoles required some negative sign somewhere to denote this special

feature of magnetic monopoles.

Now it is commonsense or instinctively clear that monopoles have to be

always attraction and never repulsion because in a bar magnet, one end

is the north and the other is the south and if you had both repulsion

with attraction, then you could never have all the "norths

conglomerated" and all the "souths conglomerated" at the other end.

But if magnetic monopoles were always attractive, then the norths can

conglomerate and the souths can conglomerate.

So, the problem for me is to find out where I need a extra negative

sign so that the Maxwell Equations with magnetic monopoles has only

attraction force for magnetic monopoles.

div*E = r_E

div*B = r_B

- curlxE = dB + J_B

curlxB = dE + J_E

Now there are three likely candidates of where to add an extra

negative sign.

The first is Gauss's law of magnetism for it introduces the magnetic

monopoles.

So do we have a -div*B = r_B as the solution?

Or another spot is the Faraday law of its new term the magnetic

current density as -J_B ? However, I wonder if the magnetic current

density term alone, stands up and tells us that there is no repulsion

force with magnetic monopoles since it is not negative termed.

Or a third spot is the Ampere/Maxwell law as -curlxB? Now if it is

this term that needs a negative sign, then the Maxwell equations would

be symmetrical overall

and no longer asymmetrical due to the negative sign in Faraday's law.

Now does it make sense? Well I think so, since the negative sign in

Faraday's law yields the Lenz law that says the direction of the

magnetic field is opposite to the bar magnet. So that Lenz's law with

the negative sign creates a repulsion.

So is it one of these three?

I suspect it is, for I cannot see how the status quo can deliver a

attraction-force-only for magnetic monopoles unless it is embedded in

the positive term of magnetic current density.

The more I think about this, the more I am leaning towards the

positive term J_B the magnetic current density, for a density term of

monopoles suggests conglomeration of monopoles of north conglomerating

with north and not repelling.

So maybe I need not add a new negative sign at all and that the J_B

term takes care of the idea that magnetic monopoles always attract,

never repel, and that the Maxwell Equations are meant to have its

slight asymmetry.

Perhaps the negative sign in Faraday's law (Lenz's law) is meant for

magnetic dipoles, not monopoles and that we need to be careful in the

Maxwell Equations of when we are talking of dipoles or monopoles.

Now I am probably more confused than when I had started. So I will

sleep on it.

--

Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google

newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I

call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now

is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,

sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,

sci.physics.electromag to?be hosted by a University the same as what

Drexel?University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to

be in education?not in the hands of corporations chasing after the

next dollar bill. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent,

simple and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012

as seen here :

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

whole entire Universe is just one big atom

where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies