Author Topic: MH's ideal coil and voltage question (Read 487979 times)

picowatt · « **Reply #1140 on:** June 21, 2016, 05:53:55 PM »

Quote from: tinman on June 21, 2016, 04:55:58 PM

So if we could achieve this perfect coupling/flux cutting,then the CEMF should be equal to the EMF that created it. In this case,no current would flow?

I would think that if you could achieve perfect flux coupling/cutting geometries, using an ideal conductor, you would create an inductor with infinite inductance from which it follows that the current flow over time would be infinitely small.

PW

MileHigh · « **Reply #1141 on:** June 21, 2016, 06:10:45 PM »

Quote from: tinman on June 21, 2016, 05:00:28 PM

Well that was boring MH,as i have already answered the question using the very formula you just used. Perhaps go back say 200 posts,and have a look.

I think the agony here,is having to keep going over the same stuff an endless amount of times with you.

Brad

I am not so sure about that. I think it's safe to assume that you never solved an integral in your life and you definitely did not go to the integral calculator web site.

The first three seconds of the question were solved using both the integral and differential equations for a coil in no time flat.

The point being that there was no need for all of the agony, and likewise even the useful tools of using visualizations and analogies and all that stuff was not really necessary. If you actually understood how a coil actually works, and you were familiar with and understood the two equations, then you yourself could have answered the full question in ten minutes flat without all of the drama and the totally ridiculous false technical arguments that you relentlessly put up as obstacles to learning. All that you had to do was apply the standard equations for a coil.

Will you learn from this experience? Unfortunately, I honestly doubt you will.

poynt99 · « **Reply #1142 on:** June 21, 2016, 06:17:11 PM »

I see it like this, and I could be wrong of course.

The voltage across the coil terminals does not change, it is determined by the voltage source. But the induced cemf is in series opposing with the voltage source Vin, and its value is determined by the frequency of Vin and the inductance L.

So, from this perspective the induced cemf is usually not equal to the applied emf (Vin). It is usually lower.

MileHigh · « **Reply #1143 on:** June 21, 2016, 06:36:45 PM »

Quote from: poynt99 on June 21, 2016, 06:17:11 PM

I see it like this, and I could be wrong of course.

The voltage across the coil terminals does not change, it is determined by the voltage source. But the induced cemf is in series opposing with the voltage source Vin, and its value is determined by the frequency of Vin and the inductance L.

So, from this perspective the induced cemf is usually not equal to the applied emf (Vin). It is usually lower.

I think that you are just going to confuse Brad with that diagram because he is going to see the CEMF being opposite the EMF and his is going to say again that there is no voltage across the coil.

I am puzzled why you would say the CEMF is not equal to the applied EMF.

Quote

its value (the induced CEMF) is determined by the frequency of Vin and the inductance L.

More like the induced current is determined by the frequency of Vin and the inductance L.

I am not sure where you are going with this, but here is a fact that I think we can agree on:

The voltage across the inductor is clamped to the applied EMF voltage, and it doesn't matter if the applied EMF is a DC value or some kind of variable frequency and amplitude AC value.

If you agree with this, then the CEMF is always equal and opposite to the applied EMF.

poynt99 · « **Reply #1144 on:** June 21, 2016, 07:29:56 PM »

Quote from: MileHigh on June 21, 2016, 06:36:45 PM

I think that you are just going to confuse Brad with that diagram because he is going to see the CEMF being opposite the EMF and his is going to say again that there is no voltage across the coil.

I don't think he will assume that. I believe he knows that even though the induced emf (cemf) is opposite in polarity to that of the applied voltage, it will almost always be less, and therefore there will still be a net applied emf and resulting current.

Quote

I am puzzled why you would say the CEMF is not equal to the applied EMF.

The EMF is applied by the user, while the cemf is self-induced; VL = L x di/dt. So according to the equation, the induced cemf can be any value and will vary depending on the frequency and inductance. The applied EMF never changes its value.

Quote

More like the induced current is determined by the frequency of Vin and the inductance L.

I believe that when there is an induced current, there is always an associated induced emf.

Quote

I am not sure where you are going with this, but here is a fact that I think we can agree on:

The voltage across the inductor is clamped to the applied EMF voltage, and it doesn't matter if the applied EMF is a DC value or some kind of variable frequency and amplitude AC value.

Yes, but this is a series circuit as well as a parallel circuit, and the induced cemf would be as I depicted.

Quote

If you agree with this, then the CEMF is always equal and opposite to the applied EMF.

As I mentioned above, the induced cemf can be any value, and is dependent on the input frequency and the inductance. I don't see any rules being broken here so help me out. Where am I going wrong?

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #1145 on:** June 21, 2016, 09:30:43 PM »

Quote from: MileHigh on June 21, 2016, 05:10:59 PM

Take a chill pill Bill. If you recall MarkE was not exactly impressed when Chet wanted to organize a test for the infamous GDS Generator. I am sure many other things helped him formulate his opinion. All that Chet has been doing has been acting like a spoiled over unity brat filled with attitude. Having him know how a former respected member of the forum sized him up was appropriate since he wouldn't stop acting like a spoiled brat that didn't get his cookies. He can have his resonance fetish without trying to ruin my perfectly good discussion about true resonance. The ignorance enforcer boy got a well-deserved smack-down. Citing MarkE's opinion was not so "low, ignorant, vile and despicable." You are over dramatizing the situation.

Actively trying to impugn a perfectly good discussion about the true scientific meaning of resonance because that disturbs your resonance fantasies, as well as continuously making false straw man arguments about someone and just being a general overall nuisance became a bit much hence the smack-down.

There is no damn reason in the world that Chet can't have his resonance fantasies, hopes and dreams while I discuss the actual meaning of true resonance and evaluate systems that may or may not be truly resonant - NONE.

Holy cow, once again you make a statement that can not be proven because the person you claim said it has passed away.

Take a chill pill?

No.

Fuck you!

Asshole!

Bill

PS You can shove that chill pill up your ass...how about that?

ramset · « **Reply #1146 on:** June 21, 2016, 10:05:54 PM »

The weaker the argument the bolder he gets

..in this case ..resonance is the low hanging fruit of fraudsters fed to the ignorant and gullible ,and will never yield ..nor has ever been a driving force in OU [which is also for the ignorant].

this is the plate Miles sets ..screaming ever louder as he falls ever shorter
his technical resonance question and resonant ramblings are lame and completely irrelevant to Brads efforts on his Bench
and are 100% for HIS own benefit and EGO

the contributions earlier in this thread by Smokey 2 were of true Value to researchers here.

there is absolutely NOTHING miles has said to Brad about resonance which will yield him One fleas Butt hair worth of benefit on the bench

No, it was not about helping Brad
it was all about Miles and his greatness.. attempting to belittle another man and put him in his place
as well as most members of this forum hunting for OU thru the effects of resonance and Tuning

the low hanging fruit of OU fools

he will put an end to this resonance nonsense once and for all.

and to think my offer to investigate a claim makes me a Nutter [miles quote]
as does my belief in LENR
as does my belief in Water as fuel [chessnyt and others]

as does my belief in OU or harvesting energy from as yet undiscovered sources with any tool possible
especially RESONANCE..

good luck in your Box miles ...

scratchrobot · « **Reply #1147 on:** June 21, 2016, 10:45:36 PM »

Quote from: tinman on June 21, 2016, 05:29:11 PM

But there not OU,and dont work so well in moon light

So you are against this site?
You should leave,before Stephan kicks you out.

Brad

Yes they are far from OU but they give you free energy. Unlike other device on this site

I'm against this kind of sites because it spreads lies and misinformation to good people with poor knowledge.

If i can't share my opinion here and tell people what i have learned from my personal OU journey than Stephan can kick me out.

MileHigh · « **Reply #1148 on:** June 21, 2016, 10:54:48 PM »

Quote from: Pirate88179 on June 21, 2016, 09:30:43 PM

Holy cow, once again you make a statement that can not be proven because the person you claim said it has passed away.

Take a chill pill?

No.

Fuck you!

Asshole!

Bill

PS You can shove that chill pill up your ass...how about that?

Yeah, I just forwarded you an email. You yourself read the same email less than a year ago as a recipient. You can swallow it, you don't have to go the other way.

MileHigh · « **Reply #1149 on:** June 21, 2016, 10:59:53 PM »

Quote from: ramset on June 21, 2016, 10:05:54 PM

The weaker the argument the bolder he gets

..in this case ..resonance is the low hanging fruit of fraudsters fed to the ignorant and gullible ,and will never yield ..nor has ever been a driving force in OU [which is also for the ignorant].

this is the plate Miles sets ..screaming ever louder as he falls ever shorter
his technical resonance question and resonant ramblings are lame and completely irrelevant to Brads efforts on his Bench
and are 100% for HIS own benefit and EGO

the contributions earlier in this thread by Smokey 2 were of true Value to researchers here.

there is absolutely NOTHING miles has said to Brad about resonance which will yield him One fleas Butt hair worth of benefit on the bench

No, it was not about helping Brad
it was all about Miles and his greatness.. attempting to belittle another man and put him in his place
as well as most members of this forum hunting for OU thru the effects of resonance and Tuning

the low hanging fruit of OU fools

he will put an end to this resonance nonsense once and for all.

and to think my offer to investigate a claim makes me a Nutter [miles quote]
as does my belief in LENR
as does my belief in Water as fuel [chessnyt and others]

as does my belief in OU or harvesting energy from as yet undiscovered sources with any tool possible
especially RESONANCE..

good luck in your Box miles ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.

So whose benefit and whose ego are we really talking about?

minnie · « **Reply #1150 on:** June 22, 2016, 12:08:30 AM »

Scratchbot, hang on in here.
What's needed is some good theoretical work to be done. I've been looking since
about 2005 and I haven't seen a proven watt, plenty of crap,though!
Check out old Leif Holmlid of Gothenburg, that's the sort of area something
could come from.
John.

tinman · « **Reply #1151 on:** June 22, 2016, 01:07:59 AM »

author=MileHigh link=topic=16589.msg486819#msg486819 date=1466523762]

Quote

Since we know that an action produces an equal and opposite reaction, then the coil has to be reacting equally and opposite to the battery. Same thing for a resistor.
So even though the battery is imposing its voltage on the coil, you need to be able to shift your perspective and go "inside" the coil and realize that the coil is pushing back with the same CEMF.

No it is not.
You are lost when you think that the total EMF is going to be converted only to a CEMF.
Every action dose not always equal !one only! opposite and equal reaction. The sum of reactions will equal the action.
E.G-3 pool balls on a pool table. Two placed side by side,and one at the other end of the table. The single ball is hit with the queue,and that single ball strikes the two at the other end of the pool table right in the center of the two balls. Each of the two balls takes of in different directions. We now have two reactions that summed together equal the action--the single ball that struck them-minus some loss due to sound.

Quote

You can take a ridiculously simple example from the physical world: If you are balancing a water jug on your head, then your head is pushing up with the same force as the water jug is pushing down. It is as simple as that.

It's not that simple at all.

Quote

Or you just have enough common sense to realize the applied EMF and the CEMF are identical without even having to think about it.

No they are not,as if they were,no current would flow,as no voltage would exist across the coil.
!OH!-unless that coil was !!ideal!!

,where the flux linkage/flux cutting was actually ideal

Quote

Kirchhoff's voltage law (KVL) The sum of all the voltages around the loop is equal to zero. This law is also called Kirchhoff's second law, Kirchhoff's loop (or mesh) rule, and Kirchhoff's second rule.

The applied EMF and the CEMF from the coil must add up to zero. Therefore, the CEMF must be equal and opposite to the EMF.

Yea--good one MH--only we do not have a loop,we have a coil attached to a voltage supply.

Brad

tinman · « **Reply #1152 on:** June 22, 2016, 01:25:31 AM »

author=poynt99 link=topic=16589.msg486830#msg486830 date=1466530196]

Quote

I don't think he will assume that. I believe he knows that even though the induced emf (cemf) is opposite in polarity to that of the applied voltage, it will almost always be less, and therefore there will still be a net applied emf and resulting current.

Of course i will not assume that.This is the very reason an electric motor will draw a lot of current at start up,and the current will reduce as the motor gains speed.
MH is just lost again.

Quote

The EMF is applied by the user, while the cemf is self-induced; VL = L x di/dt. So according to the equation, the induced cemf can be any value and will vary depending on the frequency and inductance. The applied EMF never changes its value.
I believe that when there is an induced current, there is always an associated induced emf.
Yes, but this is a series circuit as well as a parallel circuit, and the induced cemf would be as I depicted.
As I mentioned above, the induced cemf can be any value, and is dependent on the input frequency and the inductance. I don't see any rules being broken here so help me out. Where am I going wrong?

You are not going wrong Poynt,and i think MH is having a bad day.
As you would have seen in this thread,he laughed at some of us when we said that in an ideal coil,the CEMF would be equal to the applied EMF. But now-now he is saying the same thing he laughed at us for saying.
If the coil was indeed ideal,then that would be the case-->the CEMF would equal the applied EMF.
We know this is the case,and we can prove it with a thought experiment using a simple DC motor.

We apply 12 volts across a 12 volt DC motor.
The motor will draw maximum current on startup. As the rotor windings pick up speed,they cut through the stator magnetic fields quicker,and so see a magnetic field that has a greater change in time. This results in a larger value of CEMF,and so the total voltage seen across the coil is reduced,and so the current is reduced. Once running at it's top rated RPM,with no load attached to the motor,the least amount of current will be flowing through the motor,as the CEMF is now at it's greatest. Our motor is also acting as a generator<--something to remember in time to come,but say no more at this time,on this thread.
Now,if there were no resistive or frictional losses(the motor is ideal),how much current would need to flow through that motor to keep it spinning?

Brad.

tinman · « **Reply #1153 on:** June 22, 2016, 01:37:09 AM »

author=MileHigh link=topic=16589.msg486824#msg486824 date=1466527005]

Quote

I am puzzled why you would say the CEMF is not equal to the applied EMF.

Says the man that laughed at myself and Mags when we stated that in an ideal coil,the CEMF would be equal and opposite to that of the applied EMF.

As you say over there-You have drunk too much cool aid MH

Quote

then the CEMF is always equal and opposite to the applied EMF.

There you go Mag's--aint that a hoot

Brad

MileHigh · « **Reply #1154 on:** June 22, 2016, 02:31:13 AM »

Quote from: tinman on June 22, 2016, 01:07:59 AM

Yea--good one MH--only we do not have a loop,we have a coil attached to a voltage supply.

Brad

After six years, and all of the discussions that have taken place, that's just another jaw-dropping ridiculous outrageous goof that you have made that would make any poor electronics teacher want to smash his head against the wall and smash his Stradivarius violin into a thousand splinters.

I just don't know what to say. People are aghast? The sky is falling? We are at a private resort, Brad's Bizarro Retreat? Hit the resent button and hope for no BSOD?

It's just beyond belief sometimes. Somebody else can pick up the pieces with you.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: MH's ideal coil and voltage question (Read 487979 times)

picowatt

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

MileHigh

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

poynt99

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

MileHigh

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

poynt99

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

Pirate88179

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

ramset

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

scratchrobot

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

MileHigh

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

MileHigh

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

minnie

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

tinman

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

tinman

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

tinman

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question

MileHigh

Re: MH's ideal coil and voltage question