## How a Soldering Gun Works

Many people should already be familiar with the concept of a transformer, which could be a step-down transformer, that has a certain number of turns – anywhere from 200 to maybe 400 – as its primary winding, and which has a secondary winding with fewer turns.

The output voltage follows as the AC input voltage, times the ratio of secondary turns to primary turns – or, divided by the ratio of the number of primary turns to the secondary turns. The output current gets stepped up, by whatever factor the output voltage was stepped down.

What some people may not have the imagination to realize, is that it is fully valid for the secondary winding, to consist of only 1 turn, or of 2 turns. If that is the case, then the output voltage will also be ~1/200 the input voltage, and the output current will be ~200 times the input current, as long as a well-designed transformer, with a suitable core material, preserves the energy well.

If that amount of current flows through a solid bar or chunk of metal, even a solid chunk of metal will get hot. And this is the basis of a soldering gun. Its secondary winding is just a solid bar of metal, that loops through the same transformer core, which the primary winding looped through.

There are some caveats to this design. One is, that if the secondary winding really does just consist of a solid bar of metal, we will have problems with eddy currents, stealing away some of our energy. After all, the ferritic core material itself is commonly laminated, to avoid the possibility of eddy currents there; the same consideration could be given to this secondary loop…

## How Magnetic Fields Can Bend Space

According to classical concepts in Physics, Gravitational Fields can bend space, while Magnetic Fields are orthogonal to them, and as long as that model does not break, no intensity of Magnetic Field, will do what a Gravitation Field does.

But there are many ways in which the classical theories of Physics have been replaced by more-controversial ones, based on Quantum Mechanics.

(Revised 10/19/2016)

One subject which Quantum-Mechanics describes, is that of Virtual Particles. And this is my best stab at explaining ‘how they work':

The ‘normal state’ of matter, is to have positive energy, which is really just a confusing way to say that matter has positive mass, since mass and energy are equivalent, and since photons, that are generally perceived as only consisting of energy, can collide with nuclei, and cause matter-antimatter particle-pairs to be created, the combined mass of which must not exceed the energy of the incident gamma-ray photon.

This concept of matter possibly having positive energy can be misread, because the particle in question could be an electron, the electrical charge of which is defined as negative. This negative electrical charge does not prevent the electron from being positive matter, in the sense that its electrical properties are orthogonal to its mass, as a property.

But there was a famous Physicist named Dirac, who discovered quite by accident, that in correspondence with the positive-energy / mass -state of a particle, a negative-energy state is also ‘possible’, because that negative state by itself does not lead to contradictions.

The ‘inverse electron’ is positively charged, and opposite the regular electron in every way, including that the inverse one has positive charge, (and negative mass and energy). If the electron was left-handed, the positron will be right-handed.

Quite by accident, Dirac had discovered antimatter.

(Edit 05/25/2017 : It should be pointed out that this initial theory of Antimatter stands in contradiction with the modern, observed fact, that antimatter has positive mass, even though in some ways, it’s supposed to exist in opposition to ‘regular matter’. Hence, the paradox has already been commented on in depth, that while in the laboratory, Scientists are only able to convert energy into matter and antimatter simultaneously, the observed Universe consists almost entirely of matter.

Scientists cannot explain why this inconsistency takes place; they can only measure that it does.

It’s assumed that the reader is already familiar with this, and this posting is designed to have a liberal look at the subject, which could open up ways to rethink it. Trying to rethink a subject, while clinging to every assumption we may make about it, will usually not lead to any new insights. )

But under normal circumstances, the properties of empty space are defined such, that the energy-state of the electrons equals zero, which simply means that they do not exist. Yet, there is some small probability, that both a negative a positive-energy electron exist simultaneously, yet temporarily. Over slightly longer distances, relative to their distances of uncertainty, their properties cancel out. “Virtual Particle Phenomena” arise, when these particle-properties fail to cancel out completely. This usually requires some catalyst to happen, that catalyst having to consist of positive energy.

An extremely strong magnetic field – which would have to be stronger, even, than the magnetic field of a regular neutron star – is capable of evoking an asymmetry, in the paired, virtual particles of empty space. And then, if the magnetic field becomes as strong as that observed belonging to a type of start called a ‘magnetar’, a gamma-ray photon that crosses it, can cause a particle-antiparticle pair to be formed, which consume the photon, and which promptly annihilate, thus leaving behind two or more photons, that are less-energetic than the original photon was.

And so by distorting the relationship between a particle and its inverse, as belonging to a virtual-particle pair, a magnetic field can in fact have an effect on empty space. I do not know whether this meets the criteria of distorting space adequately.

Dirk

I have a piece of personal speculation to add. It might be that Dirac had an incorrect way of working with this subject.

## Black Holes Again

One of the subjects which is subject to controversy these days, is to what extent a real black hole may (not) have any features.

Certain principles in Physics are thought to be stronger, than the existence of black holes. One of those is ‘conservation of momentum’, and another is ‘conservation of charge’. Conservation of momentum already implies, that a black hole is capable of having spin, because the environment could act on it over time, exerting torque. Conservation of charge is often overlooked.

If for some reason, a black hole was to end up capturing electrons in disproportion to how many protons it captures, then what should also happen is that it should build up negative charge. This idea might cause some laughter, but the result of such a scenario would nevertheless follow.

What can be even harder to foresee, is what would happen if the black hole both had considerable charge, as well as spin. According to general principles in Physics, this would imply a ‘convection current’, and then such a black hole should also have a magnetic field.

Only, until recently it was thought that both the amount of charge-imbalance in captured matter, as well as the rate of spin, should be quite small. It was only a recent estimate I heard of, that the rate of spin was in some cases 1/3 the speed of light !!

Also, it has been proposed that there is an ‘energy jet’ which black holes emit. This energy jet might form from the accretion disk, because a strong magnetic field will generally tend to do two things to a plasma: It will compress a plasma, and it will generally tend to force its path of motion, to follow the lines of force, of the magnetic field. The latter is true, because the individual ionized particle do not travel in straight lines, instead traveling in helical paths, that are curved by an applied magnetic field. The helical paths which charged particles follow, will tend to rotate around the axis of the field, but will extend along its axis.

Well nobody has yet answered, whether the ‘energy jet’ from a black hole, initially consists mostly of protons, or of electrons and protons in a perfectly balanced way… If it was to consist mostly of the more massive protons, then the black hole and its surrounding phenomena should also become increasingly negatively charged… I do not actually visualize, the energy jet from a black hole consisting greatly of electrons…

Dirk

## Fireball Emerges from Black Hole

One subject which has vexed Science, is the question of whether Information gets destroyed, when matter “enters” a black hole – or under any other circumstances.

A recent event which has received much attention, was that a fireball seemed to emerge from a black hole:

Article

First of all, a typical black hole only has a diameter of a few meters. This is one reason for which Astronomers have never been able actually to see one. Black holes are observed indirectly, from the phenomena which are predicted to occur around them. Ubiquitous images like the ones above, are artistic renderings, aided today by CGI, that are a direct product mainly of the assumptions Scientists make about black holes.

But one phenomenon known to occur near a black hole is an “Accretion Disk”, a swirling mass of hot gas, becoming faster and hotter is it gets closer to the actual black hole. This gas eventually becomes so hot that it becomes ionized, which makes it a plasma. Eventually it is thought, that tidal forces can tear the atoms apart. But there are forces stronger than the tidal forces near the event horizon of the black hole. The problem is that those forces have largely been described as ‘friction within the Accretion Disk’.

As it happens, Astronomers have recently put a revised estimate on how fast a supermassive black hole can actually be spinning, and they came up with the result, that some black holes have event horizons spinning at 1/3 the speed of light !!  And one conclusion which this implies, is that the Accretion Disk will also become distorted near the event horizon. For one thing, there is likely to be an extremely powerful magnetic field near the black hole…

If our telescopes observe a fireball emerge from a place where a black hole is thought to reign, it is most likely a product of the Accretion Disk. When plasma moves through a magnetic field, the field affects its movement.

It was never actually implied that 100% of the matter of the Accretion Disk ever enters the black hole.

But this type of observation is part of what makes the question hard to answer, whether Information is actually destroyed. Even if we assume that the event horizon of the black hole is immutable, the Accretion Disk around it is not. The Accretion Disk contains information, and if this matter hits an immutable wall, Information within it is still not necessarily destroyed.

The question is similar to the question, of where the Energy and Information go, when a test car is made to collide with a solid wall. The Energy and Information go everywhere – except through that wall.

And, if a person was actually to witness the kind of black hole which is ‘big and quiet’ – which means that it has no more Accretion Disk – and if that person was visualized as getting sucked in to that sort of black hole, then the mass of one Human would be enough to form a brief Accretion Disk all by itself. That one Human would get wrapped around the black hole innumerable times, before some if its matter was actually captured.

And so the question which is less than clear, in connection with ‘Where does the information go when somebody gets pulled in,’ would be ‘Where does the information go immediately before somebody gets pulled in?’

Of course in Astronomy, that question gets phrased differently, as ‘Where does the information go when something gets pulled in?’ Also, in Astronomy the question doesn’t get asked, ‘What exactly happens immediately before a person dies?’ That question is more up to Forensics to answer.

Dirk

(Edit : ) Also, If the black hole is spinning, Then its event horizon is already no longer spherical. If waves in its event horizon are generally dissipated by gravity waves propagating at the speed of light, and if the black hole itself is spinning at 1/3 the speed of light, it emerges that its event horizon is also no longer immutable.

Instead, the black hole would start to resemble a droplet of fluid, which is very asymmetrical, and turbulent at least at its surface.