Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....  (Read 44994 times)

M@rcel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 95
Re: Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....
« Reply #45 on: January 02, 2008, 08:51:45 PM »
This link explains it better than I can-----http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm
and that link lead me to this one: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549

cool...

AhuraMazda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
Re: Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....
« Reply #46 on: January 02, 2008, 10:47:58 PM »
This is a little question but has been nagging me for a while.

If a capacitor is the same as an inductor (in an inverse way), is there an equivelant CEMF/BEMF observed with capaitors too?

quantum1024

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....
« Reply #47 on: January 03, 2008, 09:57:22 PM »

Yikes!!! still absorbing that statement, I got it thought.. Your right, it is discharge current!!!
Tesla spoke of radiant matter. Your description fits this nicely. ;D

Does anyone have other good links to Teslas electrostatic induction laws?

gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3287
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....
« Reply #48 on: June 12, 2011, 09:06:54 PM »
Do the magnetic poles change just because current is switched off in a coil?

The poles reverse because the field is moving in the opposite direction – collapsing instead of expanding.

The inductor wants to keep current flowing in the same direction after the current is switched off, thus the flux which is disengaging from the core will cut the wires in a direction that keeps the current flowing in the same direction.  This means the poles do not reverse after the coil is opened.  There is an internal field and an external field.  The internal field is pointing in the opposite direction as the external or applied field.  The internal field is a demagnetizing field, which means it works against the external or applied field.  It is this internal field which cuts the coil in the opposite direction as the external field when it disengages from the core, which keeps current flowing in the same direction without the poles reversing.  The internal field is moving (collapsing instead of expanding), but it's pointing in the opposite direction also, thus it's relative movement/pointing cancels each other and there is no pole reversal.

It's similar to a magnet approaching (moving towards) a coil with it's North pole, while departing from the coil with it's South pole (pointing in the opposite direction).  There will be no pole reversal in the coil in this case.  The magnet is moving in opposite directions relative to it's approach and departure from the coil, but the field is also pointing in opposite directions relative to it's approach and departure and the coil will have no pole reversal.  This maybe isn't the best analogy, but I think it's helpful in visualizing this.

GB