264:
944:. I understand the beauty of simplifying Knowledge into relatively few articles. However, in this case, there is actually very little overlap. The way these two notions (related by simply adding 1) are used is different: they serve two different communities. Just look at the corresponding example tables. Permeability folks are using large numbers, mostly for ferromagnetic cores of transformers and coils. For them adding 1 is almost as good as adding 0. On the other hand, there is a long history of using susceptibility for precision measurements such as
200:
254:
233:
191:
967:
article. Then if there was enough stuff we can split out relatively trivially the appropriate sections. I also think that there is a third audience and that are students and people studying E&M in general. They are more likely to be interested in how the permeability fits into Ampere's law for H. In the end there probably should be three articles to cover each of these topics.
776:μ is the material's permeability, measured in henries per meter. B is the magnetic field (also called the magnetic flux density or the magnetic induction) in the material, measured in teslas H is the auxiliary magnetic field, measured in amperes per metre M is the magnetic moment per unit of volume or magnetization, measured in teslas
367:
definitions which make the ampere be the amount of current such that two parallel wires carrying it, spaced at 1 meter, will feel a force of 1 newton/meter length. The ampere is inconviently large (because the coulomb is); the 10^-7 is needed to match up these large currents with the smallish magnetic force.
1041:
These have entirely different definitions. These are two entirely different quantities, which are brought into apposition by rationalisation. Susceptability is the ratio of induced polarisation density to the inducing field. In cgs, the polarisation density is Bi/cm, while the inducing field is in
661:
i shall assume by the two units given ( mu0 and 10 ) that here is where i shall put the comment. this is in regards to the two columns. i would like to state that the two are so simular that they are the same (for those who dont know). i found that for many, the difference is that one is 800,000x the
498:
It comes from the definition of the ampere. The current definition of the ampere is based on a formula that involves the permeability of free space. Because the result of that formula is defined to be a fixed number (2 x 10 Newtons, in order to define the amp), it makes the permeability of free space
387:
value 4π×10 H·m (Henries per meter being equivalent to
Newtons per square Ampere), but the exact value is 1.25663706143... H·m. Similarly the permittivity of free space is approximately (36π×10), or exactly 8.854187... F·m. The convenient upshot of these approximations is 1) they are highly (but not
641:
The value of 10 comes from the fact that metre, kg, second and ampere were all previously defined as decade-multiples of an electromagnetic system, and the decade appropriate is 10. The 4pi comes from a change of formulae from flux from a radiant source (which is what coulomb's inverse law is), to
569:
The size of the resistance unit (ohm) was selected to be as near that of the siemens unit (a column of mercury, 1 mm² in section, and 1 metre long), and the potential that nearest the daniels cell. Maxwell showed that the required system to make this happen was to have a length of 10,000 km, and a
464:
The Ampere is older than SI and even CGS. Specifically, the Ohm is the decade-emu closest to the
Siemens Unit (a resistor, 1 mm² by 1 m of Hg), the Volt being closest decade-emu to the Daniels Cell. By Ohm's law, V=IR defines the Ampere. Maxwell showed in 1873, that the practical volt-ohm-second
392:
becomes approximately 120π, 3) the speed of light in a vacuum becomes 3×10 m·s. Obviously, as the meter is now defined so as to make most measurements of the twentieth century exactly accurate (that is, so that the vacuum speed of light is exactly 299,792,458 m·s), these values for permittivity and
598:
I'm concerned about the definition of 'absolute permeability' being given synonymously with mu0. Absolute permeability is sometimes used in the SI, but not in the CGS system. All text books that I have read, eg Cheng's 'Fundamentals of
Engineering Electromagnetics' define absolute permeability as
581:
A proposal exists to redefine the ampere as x electrons per second, and the kilogram in terms of planck's constant. Under such a definition, the size of the permittivity constant comes to errors in the fine structure constant, since the resistance unit will become h/e², which is 137.036 times the
573:
The 'practical' bit was because they were intended to be used in practical use, like wiring up houses etc. They were always intended to be perfect multiples of the theoretical EMU. It's much like the practical unit of speed is km/h or mph, while the theoretical unit is m/s or f/s. The former is
980:
Further even if we fix the articles to reflect their appropriate community, they won't remain fixed for long. We are going to need to use all of the tools at our disposal in order to keep the appropriate material in the appropriate location. That means using different navigation panels and using
966:
I agree with you on the final goal. Where we disagree is how to get there. (To be completely honest my feeling in the matter aren't that strong, though.) Right now both articles are a mess each having stuff that probably belongs in the other. In my opinion it would be easier to organize in one
366:
Here's my guess: the 4 * pi shows up whenever you try to do spherically or cylindrically symmetric surface integrals in 3 dimensions, and where it appears is a matter of convention. It shows up in the permeability so some other expression will appear cleaner. The 10^-7 arises through the old SI
846:
are also clearly in favor: Overlap is a good reason for merging two or more pages on related subjects: »Knowledge is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on
577:
The 'international' bit is to deal with the constructions outside of the definition. This has nothing to do with the intended size of the unit, but what is the 'best way' of creating measures that could be used for calibration etc. In much the same way, one hears talk of 'conventional', which
565:
The "practical units of electricity" have nothing to do with cgs (since they are older than cgs in any case). The practical electrical units displaced older ones like 'a geographic mile of no. 6 copper wire', and various cells of particular construction. The new system did not prevent the old
478:
The ampere, having a definition outside of the SI, for being incorporated into SI, comes with a decade value because the SI itself is a decade-multiple of the quadrant 10gram second system. The value of 4 pi comes from a kind of rationalisation that preserves charge and current. A different
506:
The proposed new definition of the ampere is based on assuming a fixed value for e (the electric charge), instead of for the result of that formula. If they use that definition instead, the permeability of free space is no longer involved in the definition, and so is no longer forced to be a
952:). They need to be addressed in an article dedicated to susceptibility, otherwise the scope of this discussion will be lost. I wouldn't worry about the lack of manpower to edit and maintain two articles, since the user communities overlap as little as the articles themselves, in my opinion.
499:
a fixed number as well. The 4 pi comes from that formula also. The 10 in that formula is just the choice they made historically for setting the size of the amp; like when they defined the g, they foolishly made it 10 times anything useful at the time, which is why we now use kg instead.
841:
because both quantities are trivially related to each other; they are just two different ways of expressing the same physical ideas. The articles overlap to a large extent; the slow down in the edit histories shows that we do not have the manpower to maintain both of them. The rules on
502:
The current definition of the ampere is really just a stupidly convoluted way of defining the amp by fixing the value of the permeability of free space. It would be better to do that directly, instead of invoking a complicated experimental setup to generate a formula that involves it.
441:
The value 4π×10 N·A is exact. There is only really one experimentally determined constant in electromagnetism, that being the speed of light. The permeability of free space is fixed at exactly 4π×10 N·A and any uncertainty is carried by the permittivity of free
662:
other - but if the vacuum figures are the benchmark then the number is 795,774.691x. the H/m uses more digits accuracy. nickel is the odd one out (out of the ones i tested), the mu0 is 700, not 100-600 (may be due to different test field strengths?).
681:
I don’t know what difference it makes, but μ and µ are two different characters. The only difference I see (and only in some fonts) is that µ is slanted and μ isn’t. In the
Unicode character palette, µ (0x00B5) was found under Symbols :
465:
system are the emu of a system where the length is a quadrant (10,000 km), the mass unit is 10 picograms, and the second. The value of the constant is 1 henry per quadrant, and is thus 10 henry/metre because the metre is 10 quadrants.
1067:
suggests that while the figure we quote for manganese-zinc ferrites is about right, nickel-zinc ferrites are suitable for somewhat higher frequency use. Could somebody who knows more about this stuff than me see if this makes sense?
153:
906:
I will support any solution that sticks provided it doesn't end up with an article that is unwieldy and there are ways for people only looking for a subset of the information to not be swamped. I propose that you merge into
578:
refers to the most exact way of producing units. The errors in the CODATA tables is due to the inexactutde in reproducing the theoretical definitions from the implementations, not from the implementation themselves.
749:
Just before the explanation for why there is no error in the figures comes reasons why there should be. I see nothing in SI units and mathematic definitions that keep error out of real-world experimental results.
698:
U+00B5 is "MICRO SIGN", so I think when you say "μ = 1.26 µN A", the first μ should be U+03BC because it's the Greek letter being used as a variable, but the second µ should be U+00B5 because it stands for 10.
1240:
911:
then add sections in that article titled 'magnetic susceptibility', 'relative permeability', and 'permeability (magnetic circuit)' and then do redirects to the section from those three articles,
599:
the ratio of B to H in any medium you care to choose (a vacuum included). It's purpose is to reinforce the distinction with 'relative permeability' by which it differs by the factor 4 pi 10^-7.
566:
constructions, but stated that the results should be expressed in terms of a particular decade-multiple of the metric-electrostatic system. The system in use at the time was Metre-gram-second.
570:
mass of 10 picograms, along with the second. The value of 10 comes, because the henry (in emu, a length of 10,000 metres), gives 1 henry/(10,000 km), or 10 henry (ie 10,000 km) / metre.
204:
1260:
1245:
147:
44:
1101:
small fraction of a Tesla. Someone more familiar with metglas should really verify this one, since nearly everything I know of starts going into saturation well below half a Tesla.
1230:
1197:
Has anyone even read this instead of checking for formatting errors? I gave up on making sense of the article after the fifth physics blunder, and started skimming. Twenty more.
715:
If one puts the ferromagnetic material into an externally applied magnetic field, the domains tend to line up, so that the sum of the fields from the ferromagnet and the
582:
current resistance of 29.9792458 (ie 10 c). The permeability will then have an error equal to that of that of the fine structure constant. 08:36, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
723:
I suggest that the word "applied" would make more sense, otherwise it could be read that the ferromagnet field is included twice. Alternatively, it could be rewritten
419:
Well then according to your logic if we by definition make the meter, Newton, and Amp exactly these values than the given values for permittivity and permeability are
359:
Does somebody understand where 4 * pi * 10 ^ -7 comes from? 4 * pi is obviously the standard expansion factor of an eculidian universe, but the 10 ^ -7 is unexpected.
858:. This merger has recently been reverted, which I strongly oppose. I suggest that we continue the discussion for both cases, electric and magnetic, at this place. --
602:
In short, mu0 is an absolute permeability, but not all absolute permeabilities are mu0. Absolute permeability is a synonym for 'permeability', at least in the SI.
688:
s in the article to the former, which is the one I can type (option-M on a Mac). If it makes any difference and I’m in the wrong, change them all to the other μ. —
624:
is the permeability in vacuum. In gaussian, heaviside lorentz and electromagnetic systems, this is defined to unity, and may be ommitted from the formulae. mu
320:
507:
constant. This is because there is no formula for e that just involves the permeability of free space and defined constants; there is no known formula for the
1089:]) suggest the material has a saturation flux density just over half a Tesla. The 1,000,000 relative perm claimed on the site doesn't specify the field, and
901:. This is made even worse since the index of refraction is usually dependent on the square root of the relative permittivity (at the frequency of the light).
923:. I hope that merging to section will stick better. If it doesn't stick then it will be worse in the end then if you never made the merge, in my opinion.
1235:
642:
flux measured by Gauss's law (flux = charge). When charge and current are preserved (as would happen here), then a 4pi pops up in the permeability system.
1178:
Currenty citation 35 simply says "by definition". This should be in the table entry or as a note below the table to be consistent with other articles. --
79:
1087:
The values of applied field at which these permeabilities are supposedly measured seem extremely suspicious, considering that metglas datasheets (e.g.
1255:
1225:
393:
permeability in free space cannot be exact. They are, however, very convenient for engineering work. -- Charles
Robertson; no User page on wikipedia.
310:
396:
263:
1250:
1198:
948:. Unfortunately, there is a huge confusion in the literature about susceptibility definitions and units (because of loose interpretations of
479:
rationalisation, which gives the same formulae, but preserves the permeability and permittivity, is used in the heaviside-lorentz system. --
85:
168:
1159:
135:
1220:
1102:
873:
Something needs to be done and somehow made to stick. For example, I am currently trying to find a home for a lot of information on the
443:
400:
1127:
1069:
789:
518:
424:
286:
1149:
BUT, if i take Carbon steel : µ=100*4pi*10^-7= 1.2566*10^-4, and not "8.75×10−4", So , did i missed something or just an error ?
1042:
Oe, or Gb/cm. The ratio of Bi/Gb is 4pi Gb = 1 Bi. This is why in CGS, one sees epsilon = epsilon-0 + 4 pi × susceptability.
804:
908:
834:
823:
129:
99:
30:
24:
810:
There was something called ‘Intensity of magnetization’ in the defunct
Kennelly variant of the SI, which had units of teslas.
350:- these should be explained more thoroughly; in particular, it's unclear what any of these mean. --] 14:36, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
104:
20:
277:
238:
125:
74:
894:
213:
65:
920:
175:
1202:
725:"so that the resulting magnetic field is higher in magnitude than the externally applied magnetic field alone."
1163:
190:
1106:
447:
1131:
1047:
1023:
1011:
912:
886:
851:
838:
827:
793:
751:
651:
587:
508:
484:
428:
404:
389:
109:
141:
1073:
522:
1183:
916:
898:
874:
863:
667:
219:
1120:
Can someone add the characteristics of amumetal to the table? That's amumetal, not mu-metal. Thanks.
878:
663:
1155:
1123:
785:
728:
514:
779:
How can you add H and M in the parenthesis if they have different units? (H has A/m, M has teslas).
727:
I have not made the change as this needs to be confirmed by an academic who should make the change.
953:
890:
161:
55:
285:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1043:
1019:
957:
700:
647:
583:
480:
70:
1206:
1187:
1167:
1135:
1110:
1077:
1051:
1027:
994:
961:
932:
867:
843:
816:
797:
754:
731:
703:
692:
671:
655:
614:
526:
488:
451:
432:
408:
51:
805:
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/MagParticle/Physics/Quantifying.htm
1179:
990:
928:
882:
859:
889:
is used more often I think by theorists. The situation is worse in the electric side with
982:
807:) say that ‘Magnetization carries the same units as a magnetic field: amperes/meter.’
628:
is dimensionless in all cases, is a relative permeability, relative to vacuum. mu = mu
269:
1214:
813:
611:
1015:
855:
347:
343:
548:
The factor of 10^-7 arises mainly because of the transition from CGS to SI units.
605:
986:
924:
689:
557:
10^-2 going from an abampere to an ampere (because it flows in both conductors).
253:
232:
1064:
511:
that doesn't include e, and its value must therefore be found by experiment.
259:
719:
magnetic field is higher in magnitude than the applied magnetic field alone.
383:
value 4π×10 N·A." This is not true. The permeability of free space has the
881:. One thing to be aware of is that permeability is used by magnetitians in
1146:
relative permeability (µr) is =µ/µ0 So if i take it litterally : µ=µr*µ0
541:
282:
1010:
per
Xenonice. And those arguments do not influence the situation with
850:
A year ago, I did a similar merger for the electric counterparts
764:
I am copying from the
Knowledge page on magnetic permeability:
683:
Letterlike
Symbols, and μ (0x03BC) under European Scripts : -->
574:
practical for driving cars, the latter is the 'coherent unit'.
949:
945:
184:
15:
985:
templates to get the user quickly to the right article.
803:
Most textbooks I have seen, and most web pages (e.g.
767:
According to the definition of the auxiliary field, H
160:
1241:
Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Physical sciences
379:
I saw this and had to comment on the phrase "has the
281:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1261:Start-Class physics articles of High-importance
1246:Start-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
710:Usage of the word "resulting" in the following
537:You can find more information at the web-page
1231:Knowledge vital articles in Physical sciences
552:10^-5 going from a dyne to a newton of force.
355:Numerical Value of Permeability in Free Space
174:
8:
1065:http://www.ti.com/lit/ml/slup124/slup124.pdf
741:Never mind, that was a stupid idea. Sorry.
188:
512:
227:
229:
636:is like density = s.g × water. Still.
1174:Use of "by definition" as a reference
7:
275:This article is within the scope of
594:Definition of Absolute Permeability
218:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1236:Start-Class level-5 vital articles
14:
833:I propose to merge this article (
390:intrinsic impedance of free space
1256:High-importance physics articles
1226:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
1193:This is not a physics article !!
262:
252:
231:
198:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
921:permeability (magnetic circuit)
909:permeability (electromagnetism)
835:Permeability (electromagnetism)
824:Permeability (electromagnetism)
315:This article has been rated as
25:Permeability (electromagnetism)
704:06:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
693:06:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
452:16:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
1168:14:55, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
1111:10:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
995:17:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
962:00:40, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
933:21:13, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
295:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
289:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1251:Start-Class physics articles
1136:22:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
1078:11:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
1028:09:23, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
895:static relative permittivity
868:23:23, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
817:23:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
798:16:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
433:00:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
298:Template:WikiProject Physics
1083:Metglas and Nanoperm Claims
1052:08:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
656:08:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
615:10:02, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
489:08:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1277:
1221:Start-Class vital articles
1142:Relative permeablity, µ/µ0
1060:Max frequency for ferrites
782:This doesn't look right.
672:08:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
527:11:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
388:exactly) accurate, 2) the
321:project's importance scale
1207:04:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
1188:09:01, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
755:06:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
684:Greek. I changed all the
409:01:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
314:
247:
226:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
732:23:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
606:Bright Engineering : -->
561:Or something like that.
1012:electric susceptibility
913:magnetic susceptibility
897:which is then moved to
887:magnetic susceptibility
852:electric susceptibility
839:magnetic susceptibility
828:magnetic susceptibility
509:fine-structure constant
875:constitutive relations
745:No Estimation of Error
75:avoid personal attacks
917:relative permeability
899:relative permittivity
877:that is currently in
542:History of the Ampere
533:History of the Ampere
399:comment was added by
205:level-5 vital article
100:Neutral point of view
105:No original research
891:Dielectric constant
879:Maxwell's equations
737:Table values listed
278:WikiProject Physics
214:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1158:comment added by
1126:comment added by
883:magnetic circuits
844:Knowledge:Merging
800:
788:comment added by
752:Brewhaha@edmc.net
529:
517:comment added by
412:
335:
334:
331:
330:
327:
326:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1268:
1170:
1138:
822:Proposal: merge
783:
394:
338:From PNA/Physics
303:
302:
301:physics articles
299:
296:
293:
272:
267:
266:
256:
249:
248:
243:
235:
228:
211:
202:
201:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1276:
1275:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1211:
1210:
1199:192.180.201.102
1195:
1176:
1153:
1144:
1121:
1118:
1085:
1062:
847:Flammability.«
831:
762:
747:
739:
712:
679:
635:
631:
627:
623:
596:
535:
395:—The preceding
357:
340:
317:High-importance
300:
297:
294:
291:
290:
268:
261:
242:High‑importance
241:
212:on Knowledge's
209:
199:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1274:
1272:
1264:
1263:
1258:
1253:
1248:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1228:
1223:
1213:
1212:
1194:
1191:
1175:
1172:
1160:213.139.124.12
1143:
1140:
1117:
1114:
1084:
1081:
1061:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
983:template:about
973:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
936:
935:
903:
902:
830:
820:
761:
758:
746:
743:
738:
735:
711:
708:
707:
706:
678:
675:
659:
658:
644:
643:
638:
637:
633:
629:
625:
621:
595:
592:
564:
559:
558:
554:
553:
547:
545:
544:
534:
531:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
457:
456:
455:
454:
436:
435:
416:
415:
414:
413:
374:
373:
369:
368:
362:
356:
353:
352:
351:
339:
336:
333:
332:
329:
328:
325:
324:
313:
307:
306:
304:
287:the discussion
274:
273:
270:Physics portal
257:
245:
244:
236:
224:
223:
217:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1273:
1262:
1259:
1257:
1254:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1218:
1216:
1209:
1208:
1204:
1200:
1192:
1190:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1173:
1171:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1150:
1147:
1141:
1139:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1115:
1113:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1103:66.108.191.72
1100:
1097:, which is a
1096:
1093:refers to 0.5
1092:
1088:
1082:
1080:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1066:
1059:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1044:Wendy.krieger
1040:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1020:Pieter Kuiper
1017:
1013:
1009:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1003:
996:
992:
988:
984:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
974:
965:
964:
963:
959:
955:
951:
947:
943:
940:
939:
938:
937:
934:
930:
926:
922:
918:
914:
910:
905:
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
884:
880:
876:
872:
871:
870:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
848:
845:
840:
836:
829:
825:
821:
819:
818:
815:
811:
808:
806:
801:
799:
795:
791:
787:
780:
777:
774:
771:
768:
765:
760:Units problem
759:
757:
756:
753:
744:
742:
736:
734:
733:
730:
726:
721:
720:
718:
709:
705:
702:
701:Keenan Pepper
697:
696:
695:
694:
691:
687:
676:
674:
673:
669:
665:
657:
653:
649:
648:Wendy.krieger
646:
645:
640:
639:
619:
618:
617:
616:
613:
609:
608:
603:
600:
593:
591:
589:
585:
584:Wendy.krieger
579:
575:
571:
567:
562:
556:
555:
551:
550:
549:
543:
540:
539:
538:
532:
530:
528:
524:
520:
516:
510:
504:
500:
490:
486:
482:
481:Wendy.krieger
477:
476:
475:
474:
473:
472:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
458:
453:
449:
445:
444:70.253.89.209
440:
439:
438:
437:
434:
430:
426:
422:
421:by definition
418:
417:
410:
406:
402:
401:72.177.69.176
398:
391:
386:
382:
378:
377:
376:
375:
372:--Vortmeester
371:
370:
365:
364:
363:
360:
354:
349:
345:
342:
341:
337:
322:
318:
312:
309:
308:
305:
288:
284:
280:
279:
271:
265:
260:
258:
255:
251:
250:
246:
240:
237:
234:
230:
225:
221:
215:
207:
206:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1196:
1177:
1154:— Preceding
1151:
1148:
1145:
1128:150.195.9.61
1122:— Preceding
1119:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1070:212.159.69.4
1063:
1038:
1016:permittivity
1007:
941:
856:permittivity
849:
832:
812:
809:
802:
790:77.49.235.14
781:
778:
775:
772:
769:
766:
763:
748:
740:
724:
722:
716:
714:
713:
685:
680:
660:
610:
604:
601:
597:
580:
576:
572:
568:
563:
560:
546:
536:
519:94.196.243.2
513:— Preceding
505:
501:
497:
425:134.50.3.138
420:
384:
380:
361:
358:
348:permeability
344:Permittivity
316:
276:
220:WikiProjects
203:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1180:LonleyGhost
860:Marie Poise
784:—Preceding
664:Charlieb000
210:Start-class
148:free images
31:not a forum
1215:Categories
729:Just Maybe
385:aproximate
1116:Amumetal?
893:moved to
770:B=μ(H+M)
717:resulting
208:is rated
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1156:unsigned
1152:Thanks
1124:unsigned
1091:probably
954:Xenonice
814:RAClarke
786:unsigned
612:RAClarke
515:unsigned
423:exact. -
397:unsigned
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
837:) with
607:Physics
319:on the
292:Physics
283:Physics
239:Physics
154:WP refs
142:scholar
1039:Oppose
1008:Oppose
987:TStein
942:Oppose
925:TStein
919:, and
885:while
773:where
690:Frungi
677:μ vs µ
442:space.
216:scale.
126:Google
826:with
381:exact
197:This
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1203:talk
1184:talk
1164:talk
1132:talk
1107:talk
1099:very
1074:talk
1048:talk
1024:talk
1014:and
991:talk
958:talk
929:talk
864:talk
854:and
794:talk
668:talk
652:talk
588:talk
523:talk
485:talk
448:talk
429:talk
405:talk
311:High
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1095:A/m
1018:. /
950:CGS
946:NMR
682:-->
176:TWL
1217::
1205:)
1186:)
1166:)
1134:)
1109:)
1076:)
1050:)
1026:)
993:)
960:)
931:)
915:,
866:)
796:)
686:mu
670:)
654:)
632:mu
620:mu
590:)
525:)
487:)
450:)
431:)
407:)
346:,
156:)
54:;
1201:(
1182:(
1162:(
1130:(
1105:(
1072:(
1046:(
1022:(
989:(
956:(
927:(
862:(
792:(
699:—
666:(
650:(
634:0
630:r
626:r
622:0
586:(
521:(
483:(
446:(
427:(
411:.
403:(
323:.
222::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
