Modelling electromagnetic induction via accelerated electron motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The two forms of electromagnetic induction are generally referred to as motional and transformer induction, and although these phenomena have been observed and discussed for well over 150 years, certain aspects remain controversial in the scientific literature. It is well-known that an electromotive force (emf) is induced in a loop of wire encircling a long solenoid carrying alternating current. This is true however even in a region in which there is a negligibly small magnetic or electric field. Although the flux linking concept can explain the induced emf, more recent explanations utilise the concept of vector potential as the causal explanation of induction. In this present investigation, we propose that Weber’s force, based on inter-particle forces, provides a more fundamental explanation. The induced emf is measured directly across a closely wound, 1000 turn narrow coil encircling a long solenoid carrying alternating current. Weber’s force formula has been adapted to the case of transformer induction by treating the solenoid as a stack of current loops and applying the principle of superposition. Analytical calculation is also included for the application of Faraday’s law. Close agreement with experimentally measured values is demonstrated in all cases for low-frequency induction up to around 5 kHz.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".