Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars
From: Androcles (androc1es_at_nospamblueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 06/17/04
- Next message: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Previous message: Androcles: "Re: Not fair: Lorentz transformation makes Time an exception"
- Next in thread: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Maybe reply: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Reply: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:59:08 GMT
"Androcles" <androc1es@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:...
|
| "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no> wrote in message
| news:c709hr$4er$1@dolly.uninett.no...
| >
| > "Androcles" <androc1es@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i melding
| news:F3Bkc.1764$Xn1.16449769@news-text.cableinet.net...
| > >
| > > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no> wrote in message
| > > news:c6uerf$k35$1@dolly.uninett.no...
| > > >
| > > >
| > > > As always you are making a big fool of yourself.
| > > > That the electric and magnetic fields in an EM-wave
| > > > are in phase is basic knowledge.
| > > > See my response to Henry for an explanation of
| > > > why Maxwell's equations says so.
| > > >
| > > > What you say about energy conservation is plain nonsense.
| > > > That the energy density in a point changes with time and
| > > > periodically is zero doesn't mean that energy isn't conserved.
| > > >
| > > > To illustrate this point, I will give a simple analogy.
| > > > Consider a transmission line terminated with its
| > > > characteristic impedance R.
| > > > A sinusoidal wave is propagating on the line.
| > > > I will assume you know that the voltage and current
| > > > are in phase in such a wave.
| > >
| > > No, I don't know that. If that is what you think, you are nuts.
| > > (Well, we know you are anyway.) You certainly make a lot
| > > of false assumptions.
| >
| > I should have known. :-)
| > Sorry for not realizing the perfection of your ignorance.
| You are simply wrong, nTaul.
| kW and kVA are not one and the same. Be sorry for your own
| ignorance. Do a search for "power factor" and learn, there
| are many sites to find.
|
| >
| > > (That's why nothing is reflected
| > > > when the boundary condition is that it is terminated
| > > > with R, where the voltage is in phase with the current,
| > > > u(t) = R*i(t) )
| > > > The voltage can be written:
| > > > u(x,t) = Usin(wt - kx)
| > > > where U is a constant voltage,
| > > > w is the angular frequency
| > > > k is the wave number k = w/c
| > > > The current can be written:
| > > > i(x,t) = (U/R)sin(wt - kx)
| > > > The power p(x,t) is thus:
| > > > p(x,t) = ui = (U^2/R)(sin(wt - kx))^2
| > > > At an arbitrary point like x = 0, we have
| > > > p(t) = (U^2/R)(sin(wt ))^2
| > >
| > >
| > > Here we go, another stupid dtau/dt = 0 < 1 argument.
| > > Shove it, Andersen.
| >
| > I actually thought that there might be a glimmer
| > of reason in your brain, but I was obviously wrong.
| >
| > Thank's for correcting me.
|
| Your smart-arse remarks only betray just how stupid you can be.
|
| >
| > > > The power passing through the point varies with
| > > > time like sinus squared. It is always positive,
| > > > which in this context means that it is flowing in
| > > > the positive x-direction.
| > > > Energy is conserved. It all ends up as heat in R.
| > > > But the flow varies with time.
| > > >
| > > > Does the fact that incandescent lamps flicker
| > > > mean that energy isn't conserved?
| > > >
| > > > Paul
| >
| > > Gawd... this poor guy doesn't have a clue that
| > > a resistance is not the same as an impedance,
| >
| > I know that a resistance is an impedance.
| >
| > Do you know what is meant by "a 50 ohm coax",
| > Androcles? :-)
|
| You obviously don't know that an impedance is not a
| resistance.
| >
| > > doesn't understand a capacitor or a coil or how they
| > > behave. Take a course, Andersen. You are farting
| > > out of your mouth again.
| >
| > I even understand how transmission lines behave, Androcles.
| > I know it better than you can imagine.
| > That's why I find your incredible naive misconceptions
| > so hilarous.
| >
| > > Multiple choice question:
| > > A------Cap---C----coil----B
| > > A voltage V.sin(wt) is applied across A and B.
| > > The cap and coil are chosen such that the circuit
| > > resonates at w. Assume no resistance in the circuit.
| > > What is the voltage across A-C?
| > > 1) V.sin(wt)
| > > 2) V.cos(wt)
| > > 3) V.sin(wt+pi)
| > > 4) V'.sin(wt+phi)
| > > 5) 0.sin(wt+phi)
| > > 6) (infinity).sin(wt+phi)
| > > If you answer is 4), 5) or 6), give the value of phi.
| > > If you answer 4) give the value of V'.
| > > Show all work, some marks will be awarded for almost
| > > correct answers.
| >
| > Your scenario is impossible unless V = 0.
| > It may have been intentional, but I suspect it was not.
| > You are stupid enough to screw up even a trivial
| > case like this.
| >
| > Paul
| >
| Zero marks, failed miserably to understand the question.
|
|
| Are there any lurkers out there that know how to connect
| a coil and a capacitor in series, apply an alternating voltage
| across both and measure the voltage across the capacitor?
| Andersen claims it is impossible.
| The peculiar thing about Andersen's claim is that he only needs
| to look inside a cheap loudspeaker with a woofer and a tweeter
| to see such a circuit.
| Amplifier---|---Capacitor------Tweeter------ground.
| |-----Coil----------Woofer------ground.
| Androcles
|
|
- Next message: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Previous message: Androcles: "Re: Not fair: Lorentz transformation makes Time an exception"
- Next in thread: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Maybe reply: Androcles: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Reply: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: wilson time and tidal forces on stars"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|