Understanding voltage

My posts are electrical.

John

Reply to
John Larkin
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
John Fields

Some posts are connected in parallel, and some posts are cereal.

John

Reply to
John Larkin

Reply to
John Fields

s/Roy/Dimbulb/

Reply to
krw

Back to the wheatstone bridge?

Reply to
krw

formatting link

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

formatting link

Volume 1, White's Branch Arch

Reply to
ValleyGirl

I did not respond to his stupidity, idiot. I will, however, point out yours.

Reply to
RoyLFuchs

It also propagates through solids, idiot. Sound propagation has nothing to do with compressibility.

Take a small rooftop lightning rod, and an ankle chain. Walk up on a tall 14k' plus mountain.. Hold the lightning rod up.

You'll learn what voltage and current is, but it will be the last thing you learn.

Reply to
RoyLFuchs

Really Dimbulb? How does sound work in your universe?

You oughtta try it sometime, AlwaysWrong.

Reply to
krw

Wonderful! You are raising being really, really wrong to a high art.

Here, this may help:

formatting link
formatting link
See? The speed is inverse on compressibility. That was known a long time before HH was born.

You don't understand voltage, do you? Don't feel bad, lots of techs don't actually understand voltage. I suppose I'll have to explain it one of these days.

John

Reply to
John Larkin

You'll have to use small words and type real slow, for dimbulb.

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Wrong. You speak of liquids and gasses. In solids it relates to shear deformation at the lattice level. Nothing is compressed. No physical shape change occurs

In the wiki link, you should examine the portion on speed through solids, as most of the article is about speed through, and effects on gasses and liquids. Solids barely get a mention.

You probably believe that glass is a solid, and you probably think that two colliding spheres is only a momentary collision.

You should study billiards. Though the balls appear solid, they are quite elastic. Ceramic billiard balls (or other more brittle medium)would force players to re-learn everything they previously thought they knew about "English".

It is not a direct collision/vector response. The rotation of the primary moving ball at the impact point imparts some of that rotation into the ball that gets collided with. That proves that the contact is slightly more than momentary, and that friction comes into play.

Reply to
RoyLFuchs

Likely far more than you do or ever will.

You're an idiot, Larkin. Don't feel bad though. Dopey asswipes like you die alone, much like OJ will.

I suppose you should go back to the f*ck off and die barrel, asswipe.

Reply to
RoyLFuchs

-------------------- Looking at it from a machines viewpoint, the nodal analogy is, in my mind, having used both, actually better than the loop analogy. force----current voltage----velocity capacitance-----mass inductance----spring compliance conductance----resistance

Note that for gears the speed is proportional to the gear ratio and the torque is inversely proportional which corresponds to voltage and current respectively for a transformer. This is true for a lever as well. These are inverted in the loop analog but the impedance, as you note, is inverted in the nodal analog. In a motor the torque is current dependent and the voltage is related to speed. One also notes that the inertial mass of a spinning armature nicely reflects back to the electrical side as a capacitor. This analogue also more closely matches the mechanical block diagrams for multimass cases and in such cases, the nodal approach does offer some computational advantage (just as in a power system load flow or even fault analysis a nodal approach is used- simpler in that there is no need to choose loops and node choice is automatic- an admittance array is a turn the crank algorithm with no "choosing" of a base tree and branches so it is much easier to program the idiot box).

Berenak in "Acoustics" introduces both models but tends to the loop or impedance model but others in this area have used the nodal or mobility model.

What it boils down to is that the choice is really the user's preference (and such preferences are based on what one's background happens to be ).

Reply to
Don Kelly

I didn't miss it.

In case you didn't know, acceleration is not velocity. It is the rate of change of velocity.

If he has written v =Ldi/dt as opposed to f=Mdv/dt, he would have been correct. but for a constant velocity, F=MA becomes 0 for ANY mechanical resistance. V=RI is not zero for constant current for any (non-zero) electrical resistance.

Reply to
Don Kelly

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.