Re: Inertial-dampening systems
From: Timo Nieminen (timo_at_physics.uq.edu.au)
Date: 02/15/05
- Next message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: Dumb Relativity Question"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Next in thread: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Reply: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:43:23 +1000
On Tue, 14 Feb 2005 msadkins04@yahoo.com wrote:
> Timo Nieminen wrote:
> >
> > A little thought about receiving antennas might
> > suggest that two straight wire antennas side-by-side will still work
> even
> > if joined at the tips. A little further thought about transmitting
> > antennas (eg centre-fed straight wire antennas) might suggest that
> not
> > only is there no fundamental prohibition of currents being different
> in
> > different parts of a circuit, there's also no problem with transient
> > currents in open circuits.
>
> A little thought about antennas would suggest that instead of
> consisting of isolated loops (or rectangles, as in the case of my
> puzzle/query) they are attached by wires to circuits, thus providing
> configurations and current paths that do not exist in the scenario I
> provided, thus suggesting that your analogy is inapplicable and
> non-responsive.
Are you really claiming that there are no transient currents in antennas
exposed to transient fields when not connected to circuits?
> A little further thought about antennas would suggest that
> they use alternating currents, which again are inapplicable to the
> scenario I provided.
Are you really claiming that an antenna cannot detect a transient field?
> Another interesting fact about transmitting
> antennas is the fact that the ability to transmit circular EMW from a
> wire does not necessarily indicate that current is flowing in that
> wire. Alternating current, of the right frequency range given a
> particular power source, causes electrons in a conductor to vibrate
> back and forth without actually flowing as current. That increased
> lattice energy is radiated as radio-frequency EMW.
Yes, that would be a most interesting "fact". Now, I realise that many of
the introductory electromagnetics books aimed at physicists don't deal
with antennas, but the more advanced ones usually do, at least briefly
(with Landau 2 being a prominent exception, iirc), and most of the
engineering oriented books cover them in some detail.
Technically, your "fact" is actually a fact if you're describing
a waveguide-fed dielectric antenna or the like. However, you did specify a
conductor.
Now, I am interested in knowing whether you are just arguing out of
belligerent contrarianism, or whether you REALLY, REALLY, believe that you
CANNOT have transient currents induced in conductors by transient fields.
Which is it?
-- Timo
- Next message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: Dumb Relativity Question"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Next in thread: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Reply: msadkins04_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|