New Inductance

Duct tape should do just as well. In fact, better. Photons can get between the filings.

Cite the source of that Faraday quote.

Furthermore, what about motors with only ONE winding?

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:48:46 GMT, "The Real Chris" Gave us:

Look, you TOP POSTING USENET RETARD! (get a clue there too, boy)

A wire placed next to another will NOT act like a transformer. A transformer must be able to make power, and have a high efficiency.

Some stray signal mutually passed from a current carrying wire over to another proximal wire is NOT a transformer, idiot.

You need turns (plural), as well as a core.

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:53:50 GMT, "The Real Chris" Gave us:

You're an idiot.

Do you know any at all?

Ever seen a transformer used for X-ray generation? One winding is five inches away from the other with a huge, tape wound core.

Kinda blows your retarded "the closer the better" assertion all to hell.

Come back when you have one one-hundredth of a clue.

You could end up being an idiot... Oooops... too late!

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:11:32 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." Gave us:

Jeez, don't egg the boy on.

Dear Phat Bytestard:

"Phat Bytestard" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

... which meter has another connection to the other polarity terminal on the power supply, forming a loop.

Not a waveguide with only one end connected to the power supply. I think that is called either an "antenna" or "lightning" if that is the case.

A transformer induces a current flow in a separate circuit, with a current flow in the driven circuit. Lightning striking a tree outside induces a current in oriented-similarly-to-the-tree wiring, thereby burning out serial I/O chips. Nothing says the circuit on either side has to be "closed", only that current flows hoever transiently.

It is still a transformer if it makes no significant power, and is very inefficient. Search on "current transformer" (aka. "current donut").

Right, this is called "crosstalk", and cannot be relied on for a paycheck... unless you find it and remove it.

"air core transformer" 12,200 hits "vacuum core transformer" 0 hits "coreless transformer" 460 hits

"Always in motion is the future." -- Yoda

Don't argue from a "power magnetics" perspective. The Universe of electronics is bigger than that.

David A. Smith

Yes some of the questions are rhetorical. You know the limits of circuit theory. You know the advantages of it where it is valid. As far as a magnetic field being dependent on moving electric fields - no problem (in fact this is a common derivation) Now the interaction of charged particles may well be due to particles -i.e the virtual photon which is: a)not observable, b)an artifact of perturbation theory, c)may not even exist except as a useful QED technique. I have no problem with this. As to magnetic fields existing-they do and can be measured and analysed. The fact that the effect called magnetism is caused by something else doesn't make it unreal. I also note that some discussions of virtual photons try to explain them in terms of waves, simplifying by ignoring magnetic moments. In addition several quantum mechanics effects involve, directly, the use of magnetic flux density-why?- because it is useful.

Now, as to electromechanical energy conversion, assuming that what you imply by M;w and E:w as mechanical and electrical energy then one approach used in the analysis of electromagnetic devices such as motors/transformer and relays is conservation of energy along with the idea of virtual work (a form of perturbation) . Then :

change of mech energy out =f*delta(x) =change of electrical energy in + change in magnetic energy stored +change in losses.

White & Woodson, of MIT in "Electromechanical Energy Conversion" dealt with generalised machine models, involving use of the Hamiltonian and coordinate transforms. Both electrostatic and electromagnetic conversion were considered. Much of this was picked up by later authors. Gabriel Kron also wrote a very difficult to follow text using tensor analysis. While these authors were well aware of GR and Quantum mechanics, they did not deal with them because there was no need to do so.

Certainly, in terms of semiconductors, quantum theory and energy levels are important but for typical machines, classical electrodynamics is quite adequate. It may well be that for nanomachines, this is not the case.

However, you appear to want to deal with GR and energy conversion- The relationsips between GR and classical electrodynamics probably cover it.

However, any exposure that I have had to GR, QED etc was quite a while ago and I cannot and will not claim any expertise in those areas. Will I learn more? Possibly, because of curiosity. Will I argue with the Real Chris- probably not--not worth the effort.

Unfortunately, Chris

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:52:42 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" Gave us:

I didn't write that. Learn how to quote properly, and respond to the right post.

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:52:42 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" Gave us:

SAME CIRCUIT. Loading on secondary affects primary side circuitry. It is ONE circuit.

Esoteric bullshit.

Muddled nonsense.

This is true, but also rightfully argued as specialized, even if in widespread use.

Yeah, and you need a CORE to have a "paycheck" on the other side of a transformer.

For RF couplings. Not for making POWER.

Don't tell me what to do. You are smaller than that.

Learn how to read and quote properly. Half of your "responses" were to some other idiot's posted writings.

-------- Sorry, Phat. In this case, Chris is right. The key to any transformer is mutual coupling and the two parallel wires have this. Agreed, it is difficult to actually put a current through one wire without actually having a closed circuit or loop or to get some power transfer without closing a loop in the second wire but the only part of these loops that counts for transformer action is the mutual inductance. Note that a 500/1 current transformer has a straight wire through a doughnut core as a primary.

Photons can travel quite some distance. So no problem.

You don't know elementry physics.

Dear Phat Bytestard:

"Phat Bytestard" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

I was pointing out to "The Real Chris" that a loop was formed by closing the circuit. The balance of the post was directed to you. I would have taken it offline, but could decipher no valid email address for you from your header.

David A. Smith

Dear Phat Bytestard:

"Phat Bytestard" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com... ...

"The Real Chris" appears to be posting from ignorance, however much he wants to learn. You seem to be posting simply to be abusive, and ignore any corrections to your own misunderstandings.

Rather than argue with you, I'll leave you in your self-imposed darkness. Goodbye.

David A. Smith

{Don't top post. It makes you look illiterate.}

So, how does the electron spin in a permanent magnet motor, for example, produce torque interacting with the winding carrying current?

True. But that's not what I asked. How does the electron spin 'current loop' of the PM interact with the current carrying winding to produce torque?

The magnetic field may well be a convenience but it is what can be measured, modified and controlled. A virtual proton which may well be its cause is not subject to any of these factors. We are not measuring its origin. We don't actually know the relative velocity of the particles but only the effect. The question is, "what is real?" Is it what we can sense or is it the postulated basic mechanism?. All I am suggesting is that the effect -i.e. what is commonly called a magnetic field or "region of magnetic influence" exists. A car hits a pole because the driver is drunk. The cause is the drunkedness of the driver, the effect is the collision. Is the latter not real because it is not the prime cause? (There is also a relative velocity involved which definitely has a real effect on the results of the collision :))

As far as classical vs quantum ideas, what conditions are required so that the quantisation can be detected?

I don't claim to know the answers -from some reading, I have some idea but ???