Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
superconductivity magnitude of the Temperature Induced Current Chapt15.34 explaining Superconductivity from Maxwell Equations #1165 New Physics #1285 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Replies:
0




superconductivity magnitude of the Temperature Induced Current Chapt15.34 explaining Superconductivity from Maxwell Equations #1165 New Physics #1285 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Posted:
Jan 21, 2013 12:39 AM


At room temperature, silver and copper have these resistivities.
silver at 1.59*10^8 (in Ohms) ?and copper at 1.68*10^8 Now the question is, what is the induced current from a flux in Temperature?
In the Faraday law we have a flux in the bar magnet motion in a closed coil of wire. In Superconductivity, we have a flux in the temperature from the inside of the experiment to the outside world. The magnetic monopoles that compose Space has a differential of temperature of the experiment and the outside world which gives rise to a tiny minute current in the closed loop wire. So that Superconductivity is this form of a electric current:
Superconductivity = induced temperature current + applied external current Normal Conductivity = applied external current
So what is a magnitude for the induced temperature current? Well, if we apply Occam's Razor to that of silver and say that silver is the highest normal conductivity with its resistivity of 1.59*10^8 (in Ohms). Then, let us say the induced temperature current is equal to the current of 1.59*10^8 (in Ohms).
Let us be logical, in that a correct theory of Superconductivity will explain not only superconductors but normal conductors.
Important question: why would elements be the highest normal conductors, while compounds are the highest temperature superconductors? The BCS theory never explains it because BCS is fake physics. What does explain it is that temperature is a component of the Maxwell Equations and that temperature is bottled up in the terms of Gauss's law of magnetism with magnetic monopoles and Faraday's law with the magnetic current density term.
With temperature as a factor in the Maxwell Equations we go from superconductivity at near 0 to about 140 Kelvin and normal conductivity from 140 onwards.
It is seldom appreciated by anyone interested in electricity that currents flowing in wires at room temperature do remarkably well and in ease of current flow over long distances as compared to say currents of water or liquids. We seldom take the time to look at the world and say "electricity really flows well in this world of ours." In fact, so well that silver resistivity is almost superconductivity itself, considering how much we have to tamper with the temperature of the surroundings in superconductivity.
So in this reflection mode, how much of a gap or boundary is there between superconductivity and the silver conductivity? Actually, not much of a gap at all once we add in how much we insert in energy to cool the surroundings.
So the compounds used to make superconductivity is that the compounds provide the rigidity of structure that the increasing temperature would cause in increasing resistance. At a temperature of 0 Celcius, silver has that resistivity of 1.59*10^8 (in Ohms) but if the temperature were 100 Celcius, then a compound of silver would be better and do better than pure elemental bonded silver.
So a true theory of Superconductivity must start with the Maxwell Equations, with magnetic monopoles and with temperature a term in the Maxwell Equations, for we all know that magnetism fades off if the temperature increases. And a true theory of superconductivity must treat silver normal conduction as a seamless phenomenon from superconductivity.

Google's archives are topheavy in hatespew from searchengine bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years 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 electrondotcloud are galaxies



