Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?

On Aug 2, 6:00 am, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

{snip stuff I don't doubt you understand]


No... that is not what you propsed above.
phi is imaginary time.

What is imaginary about Phi? Assertion does not make it so. Show me exactly
how an angle is imaginary.

It is not a physical *angle*. It is *represented*
as an angle in a polar plot where the waveform
is periodic. You can't turn some
wire 90 degrees and cause inductors to vanish. :o)

If the load is pure resistance, we measure the current
now and the voltage now to compute the power now.

If the load is reactive we measure the current now
and the voltage *at some-other-time* (imaginary)
to compute the power now.



You were going show we don't need imaginary time.
But you used imaginary time in the second equation.

Phi is no more imaginary time than omega is. It just represent the phase
difference between the voltage and the current.

Phi in not NOW so it is imaginary.




You have said:
"Note, this is a matter of convenience, NOT a
matter of the reactance actually being imaginary!"

Show me how Phi is imaginary.

<<...the capacitor's reactance is an imaginary
number (26.5258 -90o, or 0 - j26.5258 ),
the combined effect of the two components will be
an opposition to current equal to the complex sum
of the two numbers. The term for this complex
opposition to current is impedance, its symbol is Z,
and it is also expressed in the unit of ohms, just like
resistance and reactance. In the above example,
the total circuit impedance is:...>>
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_4/3.html





So take phi out of the equation and prove your
statement... or withdraw it.

The dollars in your bank account as calculated by your bank is out of phase
with the cheques you have issued and deposits you have made. That does NOT
make those cheques and deposits imaginary. They are quite real. Even if a
cheque gets lost in the mail, it is real.

All currency is imaginary. The case of Chardonay it
buys is real.


[despirate thrashing and semantic gyrations snipped]

Can the semantics. :o)

If 1/60 second is 360 degrees how many seconds is
45 degrees?

Sample the current and voltage 45 degrees after a zero crossing
Multiply together. Do you get kilowatts?

That's unreal! You KNOW it is milliwatts or microwatts.
When you skewed the sample for the imaginary current
by an imaginary time (phi) , you got the real answer.



If you don't believe me, still, perhaps you will take this quote from
the book cited above:
[quote from page 85, complex impedance]
It is convenient to represent the two elements of reactance, the
magnitude and phase angle, in such a way that the results of combining

There is no angle. It is a time.

several resistances and reactances can be determined easily. This is
done by representing reactance as a complex number. The real part of
the complex number is associated with the resistance while the
imaginary part stands for reactance.
[unquote]

Note, this is a matter of convenience, NOT a matter of the reactance
actually being imaginary!

You have been laboring under a misconception.

You have been laboring under a similar misconception when thinking
about time in Minkowski space, it is a matter of convenience, not a
matter of time being imaginary!

I realize that it is sometimes difficult to give up ones illusions. But a
scientist is always ready to reexamine ones cherished beliefs and abandon
them when they prove to be at odds with reality. Can you let go of the idea
that an angle is imaginary or show me why it must be?

OK ... I have a capacitor in my hand. What angle do I
turn my wrist so it will behave like an inductor. :-)

Or would you rather answer how many seconds,
voltage will lag current by, if I connect the capacitor to a
60 Hz supply?

I'll take the latter problem. By rejecting a formalism
that labels some things as imaginary, you have lost
track of what is real.

Sue...





.