Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:BIsAPseudovector.svg

Magnetic Field is a Pseudovector

 * Reason:It is an excellent demonstration for how a pseudovector behaves differently from a vector under improper rotation. This example would be clear for anyone with a basic (year 12) understanding of magnetism. The direction of the B field is dependant on the direction the current flows through the loop. Rotating a loop about 180 degrees does not change the B field direction. Mirroring the loop on the same axis causes the current to flow in the opposite direction, inverting the B field produced.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Magnetic field, Pseudovector
 * Creator:Sbyrnes321


 * Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 02:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Perhaps this is picky, but the field lines closest to the mirror seem like they wouldn't quite meet up inside the loop. The mirror is also closer to one side than the other. -- Avenue (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed both. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I think something's messed up. The arrows in the right side are reversed. This should follow the right hand rule and point down, no?  upstate NYer  01:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats correct (and rather the point of the diagram). I forgot to move the arrows when re-mirroring it. Fixed now. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Except now I see that mediawiki can't render it properly :(. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Stroke-Path fixed that. Turns out that inkscape has bugs (the black arrow heads) and the renderer has bugs too. It makes things difficult. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Simple and effective. I can't see any real flaws now, although the mirror line seems a bit heavy-handed to me. The EV is especially good in magnetic field, IMO. --Avenue (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Useful in understanding the articles. Technically sound now :)  Jujutacular  T · C 22:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. If this is as accurate and useful as people say it is (I really don't feel qualified to judge; I've tried to read the article twice, it's just not happening- always hated magnetism...) I am happy to support it. I wouldn't like to see this not promoted because people like me don't understand what's going on. J Milburn (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No quorum. Probably worth re-nominating at some point. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)