What is your EM crankosity?
in [Relativity]
|
From: Androcles on 24 Sep 2009 12:29 "Bill Miller" <billmillerkt4ye(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:7i1hivF2vg0kkU1(a)mid.individual.net... > > "Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote in message > news:mVzum.166988$4f4.148206(a)newsfe11.ams2... >> >>> Bill >> >> I understand the janitor was fired for mopping the toilet bowl with >> a burger bun and then ate the evidence with fries, ketchup and a >> healthy dose of salt. It wasn't his lunch break so he had to be >> dismissed. > Fantastic! Maybe there is hope for me. > > And for Benj. > > Benj told me that his boss, the janitor, was a goof-off that didn't > understand EM. Now that he's gone, maybe Benj will be promoted to janitor > and I can get his OLD job! > Well, yeah... If you understand EM you could qualify for ketchup squirting. I was in a Burger King in Binghamton NY once and ordered a burger with no ketchup. It only took three attempts to not put ketchup on my burger, the ketchup squirter guy was really industrious. I had to yell really loudly "NO KETCHUP" as he held the squirter in his hand poised ready to squirt red goo on the third burger. He had a badge that read "Hello, I'm Ben", too. Perhaps he's the same Binge Jocaby and wants to be the new janitor.
From: John Kennaugh on 24 Sep 2009 12:41 Androcles wrote: > >"Benj" <bjacoby(a)iwaynet.net> wrote in message >news:4468a5bf-7dfd-4803-9048-fbe43e4f1b0c(a)e34g2000vbm.googlegroups.com... >On Sep 23, 5:30 am, John Kennaugh <J...(a)notworking.freeserve.co.uk> >wrote: >> Benj wrote: >> >Are you a Maxwell loon? > >> no. > >> >How well do you understand Maxwell's equations? > >> I don't but I know a man who does. Ivor Catt has made a major >> contribution in making computers work faster by studying how EM energy >> actually moves. He found that standard EM theory wasn't very useful. In >> his critical study of Maxwell's equations he points out that the >> accepted idea that the change of H field *causes* the change in E field >> and vice versa is pure fabrication. Nothing in the equations can justify >> that assumption. In fact Catt concludes that the only information >> contained in the equations is the speed c and that at every point E and >> H are in fixed proportion Zo = 377 ohms. Catt claims that this simple >> fact is not mentioned in any physics text. >> >> http://www.ivorcatt.com/2804.htm > >It's a very interesting link. I was not aware of Ivor Catt, but his >conclusions are the same as those persons who eventually I will be >referencing here. As you observed, his work already gives the answers >to several of my questions. For anyone checking out the link I urge >you to follow the sub-links in that URL to other papers such as the >Maxwell Revisited one. Unfortunately the figures and drawings in the >original German paper was on Compuserve which is now dead. Hopefully a >working link will be put back. Check it out. > >=============================================== >Aside from an interest in history/psychology, why would anyone >want to search/research for Maxwell's aether? It is a blind alley, >I urge you not to go that way. By all means meet Gauss, Ampere >and Faraday along the road, but don't turn left into Maxwell's >cul-de-sac looking for original Scottish papers that have been >translated into German. >Why would Maxwell write an original paper in German? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwell You have your knickers in a twist my friend. "Maxwell Revisited" is an article written by Ivor Catt. Ivor Catt translated his own article into German and that was at one time on a now defunct website. He refers to the diagram on that website - which you can manage without if you have an imagination - to illustrate the text of his article. I don't think anyone but you mentioned aether. > >I won't say "idiot", no point in stating the obvious. -- John Kennaugh
From: Szczepan Białek on 24 Sep 2009 13:15 "Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote news:ovMum.150320$Xh5.91831(a)newsfe01.ams2... > > > It's called voltage doubling and you can block the discharge > of the cap with a diode. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_multiplier Antennas are like the Kundt's tube. The voltage is the same like the pressure. The pressure is also doubled. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kundt's_tube > > If you disagree then I do not care what your opinion is. > Actually I don't care what your opinion is even if you agree, > it won't prevent voltage multipliers working. But I care what your opinin is about the Acoustic analogy, S*
From: Androcles on 24 Sep 2009 13:53 "Szczepan Bia�ek" <sz.bialek(a)wp.pl> wrote in message news:h9fu7p$8hg$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... > > "Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote > news:ovMum.150320$Xh5.91831(a)newsfe01.ams2... >> >> > It's called voltage doubling and you can block the discharge >> of the cap with a diode. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_multiplier > > Antennas are like the Kundt's tube. The voltage is the same like the > pressure. The pressure is also doubled. See: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kundt's_tube > >> >> If you disagree then I do not care what your opinion is. >> Actually I don't care what your opinion is even if you agree, >> it won't prevent voltage multipliers working. > > But I care what your opinin is about the Acoustic analogy, > S* Yes, the math would be similar. The sonic boom is well known, the sound pressure rises sufficiently to break windows. It's no different to a speeding boat making pebbles on the lakeshore or river bank move. In the Kundt's tube air molecules are travelling in opposite directions and meet at a node, doubling the pressure. In the antenna it's the electrons that do that, but it is the LC rather than the RC circuit that best models it. http://www.thekeeser.com/Electronics%20info/measure_an_unknown_inductor.htm
From: Bill Miller on 24 Sep 2009 14:14
"Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote in message news:ovMum.150320$Xh5.91831(a)newsfe01.ams2... > > "Bill Miller" <billmillerkt4ye(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > news:7i1dqvF2vn8paU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> <snip>> > For an RC circuit, > > a-----/\/\/\/\/\/----b-----||------c > > merely allow the voltage across bc to reach the value across ac > (charge the capacitor) and then reverse the polarity across ac > and measure bc before the cap discharges. > It's called voltage doubling and you can block the discharge > of the cap with a diode. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_multiplier > > If you disagree then I do not care what your opinion is. > Actually I don't care what your opinion is even if you agree, > it won't prevent voltage multipliers working. > Well... lets add a few MORE components and make the simple RC circuit into an inverter so that you can get whatever value that you wish across the capacitor. That is not what I was talking about. And I don't care if you don't care if I don't care if... All the best, Bill > > |