All About Circuits - Newsgroup Archive Forum Index All About Circuits - Newsgroup Archive
These forums contain an archive of usenet posts relating to electronics. These usenet posts are a great resource. Click the 'search' link to search for a topic, or browse through the posts.
 
Back To: please note - you cannot post on these forums. this is a usenet archive, new posts are not permitted. please visit our forums to create a new post
   SearchSearch 
Electrodynamics' spin
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 114, 115, 116
 
   All About Circuits - Newsgroup Archive Forum Index -> sci.physics.electromag


Author Message
Guest






PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:04 am    Post subject: #117 vortices in superconduction = capacitance longitudinal

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(snipped)
Quote:

If the above is true in whole or part then there should be
similarities or symmetries
with the Quantum Hall Effect for DC current compared to AC current:


An interesting research report that follows in the lines of my above.

--- quoting http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0026-1394/44/1/002
The ac quantum Hall effect as a primary standard of impedance

J Schurr et al 2007 Metrologia 44 15-23 doi:
10.1088/0026-1394/44/1/002

J Schurr, F J Ahlers, G Hein and K Pierz
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany

Abstract. The quantum Hall resistance measured at frequencies in the
kilohertz
range shows frequency- and current-dependent deviations from the
quantized dc
resistance value. This has been attributed to capacitive effects which
are reflected
in the ac longitudinal resistance. Nulling the ac longitudinal
resistance results in a
frequency- and current-independent quantum Hall resistance. This
criterion is in
close analogy to the dc case and shows that the quantum Hall effect
measured
with ac is the same as with dc. This allows application as a primary
standard of
impedance.

--- end quoting ---

So Superconductivity has this pattern:

AC superconduction = DC superconduction + vortices

according to the above Quantum Hall Effect we have this pattern

AC Quantum Hall Effect = DC Quantum Hall Effect + capacitance
longitudinal resistance

So this brings up the interesting question of whether this is true?

Vortices = capacitance longitudinal resistance

I cannot tell from the scant above abstract and since I have no way of
paying for a download
to view the entire report of above. But I would hazard to guess that
the above is true.

That,

Vortices in Superconductivity is the same thing as the Capacitance
longitudinal resistance

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Back to top
Daniel Mandic
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:03 pm    Post subject: Re: relationship between electrons and photons

franklinhu@yahoo.com wrote:

Quote:
Think for a moment - has this exact experiment ever been done? It is
spoken about as if it had been done, but our photon detectors are no
where near 100% efficient (which would be required to detect single
photons). Some experiments claim to detect single photons, but without
100% efficiency, I don't see how that is possible. I heard that the
equivalent experiment using electrons was executed in the early 70's,
but not that it had been peformed yet with light. So we may all be
confused about something that hasn't been shown to experimentally
happen - it only happens in our imagination according to quantum
mechanics.

According to my models, light can only exist in waves, so it would be
impossible for a "photon" to only pass through one of the slits. The
photon is a wide wave like a ripple in a pond and the only way to stop
the photon from reaching the other slit would be to block it since it
will physically reach it. Once again, we only get a confusion if we
assume light can be a localized particle - which it cannot and assume
experiments have been performed - which they have not.

Hi there!


What about electric tension (amerind: Voltage)?

Can someone decribe, or give at least to its best a theory about? Does
it (DC) start from minus, does it start at plus, or at both ends at
once!?



Kind regards,

Daniel Mandic
Back to top
Randy Poe
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:47 pm    Post subject: Re: relationship between electrons and photons

On Mar 30, 6:22 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
Quote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:25090b0a-adbc-45fa-9ce2-3294fddc292d@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
| On Mar 30, 2:21 pm, Ralph Hertle <ralph.her...@verizon.net> wrote:
| > You can't prove that the photon is not a discrete existent and that the
| > appropriate experiments are not possible.
|
| > What facts exist that indicate that the photon actually exists?
|
| Thousands of experiments. Off the top of my head:
|
| Direct evidence:
|
| Single-photon diffraction experiments, single-photon *anything*
| experiments.
|
| Indirect evidence: blackbody radiation and the photoelectric
| effect, which are inconsistent with un-quantized light. Why
| is there a minimum frequency for the photoelectric electrons
| to be emitted?
|
|
|
| > The photon science should start from the basic facts.
|
| Single photons are routinely detected in experiments all
| the time.

Which is why their speed is directly proportional to wavelength -

Counter to experimental observation.

Quote:
red and blue shift is routinely observed and Einstein's
crackpottery is not routinely observed or ever observed.

On the contrary, the record of experimental confirmation is
a century old now, and growing.

On the other hand, there is no experimental confirmation
of the effect you claim, dispersion of light in vacuum. And
where there is dispersion (in air for instance), it certainly isn't
as strong as "speed is directly proportional to wavelength". That
would
mean that 650 nm red light travels 50% faster than 433 nm
blue light. It would mean the sun should be a rainbow-colored
smear in the sky, with the blue sun image being several
minutes behind the red sun image. And it would mean 100 MHz
radio waves, with a wavelength of 3 m, should travel 4.6 million
times faster than red light. Why, we ought to be able to get
radio signals from Mars in about 40-50 microseconds instead
of the several minutes those silly NASA people have been
waiting.

- Randy
Back to top
Theo Markettos
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Rate of change of core saturation

Wimpie <wimabctel@tetech.nl> wrote:
Quote:
For your application, I do not expect capacitance to be a problem
(unless you are going to used many turns in combination with very low
drive current).

Thanks for that. It's not really an 'application', it was just a
hypothetical example trying to understand the second-order effects. I think
I understand a little better now :)

Theo
Back to top
Androcles
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:37 pm    Post subject: Re: relationship between electrons and photons

"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e0236b7d-fc30-4c3e-97b4-da02035297bd@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
| On Mar 30, 6:22 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
| > "Randy Poe" <poespam-t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
| >
| >
news:25090b0a-adbc-45fa-9ce2-3294fddc292d@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
| > | On Mar 30, 2:21 pm, Ralph Hertle <ralph.her...@verizon.net> wrote:
| > | > You can't prove that the photon is not a discrete existent and that
the
| > | > appropriate experiments are not possible.
| > | >
| > | > What facts exist that indicate that the photon actually exists?
| > |
| > | Thousands of experiments. Off the top of my head:
| > |
| > | Direct evidence:
| > |
| > | Single-photon diffraction experiments, single-photon *anything*
| > | experiments.
| > |
| > | Indirect evidence: blackbody radiation and the photoelectric
| > | effect, which are inconsistent with un-quantized light. Why
| > | is there a minimum frequency for the photoelectric electrons
| > | to be emitted?
| > |
| > |
| > | >
| > | > The photon science should start from the basic facts.
| > |
| > | Single photons are routinely detected in experiments all
| > | the time.
| >
| > Which is why their speed is directly proportional to wavelength -
|
| Counter to experimental observation.

This pencil is bent - that's experimental observation, you fuckin' crank
troll.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/geoopt/optpic/brokpen.jpg
Back to top
Bill Miller
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 am    Post subject: Re: relationship between electrons and photons

<srp2inc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f2eb2c7-7a7b-49c6-91f0-9a18d89ed388@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On 28 mar, 05:03, shsfowcn...@mailinator.com wrote:

The actual relation is that anytime an electron is forced to slow
down, the energy now in excess evacuates as a photon. The
process is called bremmstrahlung, and although all occurences
boil down to this, it is seldom refered to as such.

Are you saying that all radiation is bremmstrahlung,? I got my a**s chewed
pretty fiercely by a couple of High Energy folks when I suggested that on a
different thread. They maintained that bremmstrahlung is strictly a High
Energy phenomenon that manifests itself then near-light-speed charges either
bang into one another (or something else) and move suddenly in a different
direction OR come to a (forced) screeching halt.

Suggested reading on this phenomenon?

Because each of them, after having been emitted previously by a
slowing
down electron, travels as a self sustaining and self propelling
quantity
of energy as part of its energy oscillates between an electric state
and
a magnetic state.

NOT SO! In an Electromagnetic (EM) wave, the E and H components are in
phase. There is no possibility for such a system to oscillate from one state
to another. Both states exist at the same time.

André Michaud

Bill Miller
Back to top
hanson
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:05 am    Post subject: Re: Andro's Keplerian orbit plot & the n-body problem

"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
news:cdyHj.37287$w51.31550@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Quote:
"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:5EvHj.1380$p97.1094@trnddc03...
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:DflFj.312642$3m6.167466@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
|
| > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > news:maiFj.4737$Oj5.4452@trnddc06...
| > | "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| > | news:yGhFj.64867$M9.35732@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
| > | > The link again is:
| > | > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.xls
| > |
| > | hanson wrote:
| > | NOW that your link arrived, double clicking on it worked just fine.
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3760e9bcc757513d
|
| Androcles wrote:
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/1b962698cba7fb01
| > Copernicus.exe (which I wrote over 15 years ago) allows
| > for 10,000,000 points. 100,000,000 points and you need a
| > faster computer. I'm not planning on increasing the point count
| > for a spreadsheet.
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LCV.htm
|
| > | hanson wrote:
| > | Shit! Gotta run! Pool pump in the grotto just "exploded"
| > | Water's all over!... ahahahaha.... lata alligata!....
| > |
| Androcles wrote:
| > Thanks for your help, it is appreciated. Now go fix the pool pump.
| > |
| hanson wrote:
| ahaha... AHAHAHA... your all heart, Andro... Kelperian orbits
| first!... ahahaha... --- But no, I didn't fix the pump. I couldn't
bring
| my heart to do it when I saw the "little twits" having the time of
| their young lives having great fun under their new "waterfall"...
| So, I checked whether there were any el. shock dangers and
| there were not. A faulty safety valve had burst and created
| a huge "fountain"... ahahaha... So, I let'em play under it for an
| hour until they got bored. -- We celebrated Easter here, in
| Raratonga, with the tribe and staffs united. After few days they
| all left, back to their own lairs and salt mines or sugar loafs.
| That's when the crews will come for clean up and do repairs
| and maintenance.
|
Androcles wrote:
Sounds like the "faulty" safety valve was doing its job. :-)

hanson wrote:
| Anyway, now we can gp back to your Keplerian Orbit plots ,
| <http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.xls> ... [1].
| for which you say to have no plans to "increase the point count".
| But listen man, if I were as interested as you are in searching
| for new ways to look at things I'd give that some more attention.

Androcles wrote:
I shoved it out to a nice round 100, improved the plot, added
the centre and the focus.
Also you can see the data in columns J and K.
If you know how to use Excel you can unhide the columns, but I fail to
see how a thousand entries in a column would be useful. It can be done
but it would make the program 10 times larger.

hanson wrote"
| I thought that YOU were after a novel way for you to see & explain
| gravitational n-body interactions, in an analog fashion like you
| did for the light intensity/freq. curves in your
| <http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LCV.htm
|
| A refinement in [1] by/with tilting the view angle onto the ellipses
| until they become perfect circles ought to give you the loci of the
| gravitational zero/balance-points (like L3/L4 etc), those positions
| in 3D space which may be used for to find solutions for the old
| 3-body/n-body problem. -- Go for it if it strikes your fancy.
| Good luck and take care, Andro,
| hanson

Androc les wrote:
That would be outside the purview of Kepler's equal areas in equal
times law.
Key here is that because the time between points is always
the same, the distance between points is a measure of velocity.
Because the velocity of light HAS to be source dependent (despite
the crank Einstein's claims to the contrary) and Algol CANNOT be
an eclipsing binary (despite the 18-year-old Goodricke's theory)
(see http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/Algol.htm )
the light curve of Algol is generated by Copernicus.exe by a star
in orbit with a large body, in close agreement with

"HD 189733 may not seem to be remarkable, but it is known to have at least
one hot, jupiter-sized planet orbiting very close, with an impressively
short period of 2.2 days.
(see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080321.html )

Thus the extent to which Einstein's crackpottery has led the world
astray is truly astronomical.

hanson wrote:

"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote
Quote:
Why a circular orbit doesn't help with Lagrange:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.htm

hanson wrote:

Yo, Andro, that is a wonderful depiction and very elegant...
I reposted your post here as a follow-up to these 2 posts here in
Re: "Andro's Keplerian orbit plot & the n-body problem
<http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/196fa175940684da>
<http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/ec0d0a7211db0d96>
Say, Andor, have you tried to offer your Website contents to some
Uni for pedagogic purposes?. You should. You really should.
Thanks and take care man,
hanson
Back to top
Autymn D. C.
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:58 am    Post subject: Re: THE SINS OF RELATIVITY (AND MAXWELLIAN) THEORY?

On Mar 29, 1:50 am, "Szczepan Bialek" <sz.bia...@wp.pl> wrote:
Quote:
 "Autymn D. C."
The vacvum loses resistanse at infinity.
The beams may attract by a proxy magnetism at first, but would bound

back as they slowd.

Are available any "experimental data"?

Are maths and cinematics experimental? The AC reactive time-constant
for finite C and R should be a good leed.
Back to top
Androcles
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:25 pm    Post subject: Re: Andro's Keplerian orbit plot & the n-body problem

"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:wTfIj.8284$QW6.5590@trnddc07...
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:cdyHj.37287$w51.31550@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
| > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > news:5EvHj.1380$p97.1094@trnddc03...
| > | "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| > | news:DflFj.312642$3m6.167466@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
| > | >
| > | > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > | > news:maiFj.4737$Oj5.4452@trnddc06...
| > | > | "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| > | > | news:yGhFj.64867$M9.35732@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
| > | > | > The link again is:
| > | > | > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.xls
| > | > | >
| > | > | hanson wrote:
| > | > | NOW that your link arrived, double clicking on it worked just
fine.
| > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3760e9bcc757513d>
| > | >
| > | Androcles wrote:
| > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/1b962698cba7fb01>
| > | > Copernicus.exe (which I wrote over 15 years ago) allows
| > | > for 10,000,000 points. 100,000,000 points and you need a
| > | > faster computer. I'm not planning on increasing the point count
| > | > for a spreadsheet.
| > | > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LCV.htm
| > | >
| > | > | hanson wrote:
| > | > | Shit! Gotta run! Pool pump in the grotto just "exploded"
| > | > | Water's all over!... ahahahaha.... lata alligata!....
| > | > |
| > | Androcles wrote:
| > | > Thanks for your help, it is appreciated. Now go fix the pool pump.
| > | > |
| > | hanson wrote:
| > | ahaha... AHAHAHA... your all heart, Andro... Kelperian orbits
| > | first!... ahahaha... --- But no, I didn't fix the pump. I couldn't
| > bring
| > | my heart to do it when I saw the "little twits" having the time of
| > | their young lives having great fun under their new "waterfall"...
| > | So, I checked whether there were any el. shock dangers and
| > | there were not. A faulty safety valve had burst and created
| > | a huge "fountain"... ahahaha... So, I let'em play under it for an
| > | hour until they got bored. -- We celebrated Easter here, in
| > | Raratonga, with the tribe and staffs united. After few days they
| > | all left, back to their own lairs and salt mines or sugar loafs.
| > | That's when the crews will come for clean up and do repairs
| > | and maintenance.
| > | >
| Androcles wrote:
| > Sounds like the "faulty" safety valve was doing its job. Smile
| >
| hanson wrote:
| > | Anyway, now we can gp back to your Keplerian Orbit plots ,
| > | <http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.xls> ... [1].
| > | for which you say to have no plans to "increase the point count".
| > | But listen man, if I were as interested as you are in searching
| > | for new ways to look at things I'd give that some more attention.
| >
| Androcles wrote:
| > I shoved it out to a nice round 100, improved the plot, added
| > the centre and the focus.
| > Also you can see the data in columns J and K.
| > If you know how to use Excel you can unhide the columns, but I fail to
| > see how a thousand entries in a column would be useful. It can be done
| > but it would make the program 10 times larger.
| >
| hanson wrote"
| > | I thought that YOU were after a novel way for you to see & explain
| > | gravitational n-body interactions, in an analog fashion like you
| > | did for the light intensity/freq. curves in your
| > | <http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LCV.htm>
| > | >
| > | A refinement in [1] by/with tilting the view angle onto the ellipses
| > | until they become perfect circles ought to give you the loci of the
| > | gravitational zero/balance-points (like L3/L4 etc), those positions
| > | in 3D space which may be used for to find solutions for the old
| > | 3-body/n-body problem. -- Go for it if it strikes your fancy.
| > | Good luck and take care, Andro,
| > | hanson
| >
| Androc les wrote:
| > That would be outside the purview of Kepler's equal areas in equal
| > times law.
| > Key here is that because the time between points is always
| > the same, the distance between points is a measure of velocity.
| > Because the velocity of light HAS to be source dependent (despite
| > the crank Einstein's claims to the contrary) and Algol CANNOT be
| > an eclipsing binary (despite the 18-year-old Goodricke's theory)
| > (see http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/Algol.htm )
| > the light curve of Algol is generated by Copernicus.exe by a star
| > in orbit with a large body, in close agreement with
| >
| > "HD 189733 may not seem to be remarkable, but it is known to have at
least
| > one hot, jupiter-sized planet orbiting very close, with an impressively
| > short period of 2.2 days.
| > (see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080321.html )
| >
| > Thus the extent to which Einstein's crackpottery has led the world
| > astray is truly astronomical.
| >
| hanson wrote:
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote
| > Why a circular orbit doesn't help with Lagrange:
| > < http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.htm >
| >
| hanson wrote:
| Yo, Andro, that is a wonderful depiction and very elegant...
| I reposted your post here as a follow-up to these 2 posts here in
| Re: "Andro's Keplerian orbit plot & the n-body problem
| <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/196fa175940684da>
| <http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/ec0d0a7211db0d96>
| Say, Andor, have you tried to offer your Website contents to some
| Uni for pedagogic purposes?. You should. You really should.
| Thanks and take care man,
| hanson
|
It's there for all to see. <shrug>
I need to clean up Orbit.html, add it to the index, but I doubt
any Uni profs would be pleased to have their life's work teaching
Einstein's garbage trashed.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
   All About Circuits - Newsgroup Archive Forum Index -> sci.physics.electromag All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 114, 115, 116
Page 116 of 116

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


sitemap