Re: A Crazy question for crazy people?


guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Impedance = R + 90deg XC - 90deg XL

1. XC & XL are simply out of phase(180 deg) but along the same axis
which is 90deg from R?

XC & XL are along the same axis = only 1 axis in spacetime (this is
different from #2 below)??

Ahhh... Yeah Fitpatrick discusses this in the chapter
"Advanced Potential?"
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node28.html

It seems more a disclaimer than an enlightner. :-(



2. They say XC proportional(related) with electric permittivity & XL
proportional with magnetic permeability?

Probably they say that here:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html


But isn't Electric Permittivity(electron traveling in a wire) &
Magnetic Permeability (EM photon wave) are not along the same axis but
instead are perpendicual (not 180 deg phase shift) and therefore 90 deg
from each other = 2 axis in space (this is diffent from #1 above)??

Even if I knew how to put that in words it would put 5 cricks
in your neck. I'll have to leave it at this:
This popular figure can be very misleading
http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/visualizations/light/Thumbnails/eblightthumb.jpg
Its spatial fidelity exist only along the direction of propagation.
the other two axes are *representing* magnetic and electric
intensity. Note they are drawn in the same phase so the 90
degress which you see is only for the illustrator's convenience
*in this particular graphic*.

Yes... those components are normally represented at 90
degress. The pitch parameters of a CP helical antenna probably
convey more about the near field reactive components.

http://www.cebik.com/vhf/gh2.html

An accurate graphic would need
details about nearby matter to represent the magnetic component.
You can conceive a path with NO magnetic component whose
coupling structures are described here:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0506053




So where did I do wrong (I thought permittivity was along the same axis
as the electric field and travel in space and permeability was
perpendicular to both of these = 90 degrees of separation)?

You are trying to do what Oliver Heavisidse might have done for us.
(He prefered making money down at the telegraph office to throwing
pearls before swine)

The near field wave impedance is plotted on 3 axes that don't
have an obvious tranformation to the 4 axes of Lorenz space-time.
because only retarded potential is represented as an
imaginary on that CS. Little sine wave wiggles in
the near field might be an approximation in Lorenz space.

If you compare the nearfield of a small shielded loop
(magnetic coupling 1/r^3) with the nearfield of an
electric dipole (Coulomb coupling 1/r^2)...

http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif

....it might be apparent why it is hard to represent the
reactive power in the near-field in Lorenz space.
(hard to represent does not make it go away)

Eh... not so crazy a question but there is no
contest and no prize so no reason to disqualify it.

Sue...



Is Bilge bald?

.