author=MileHigh link=topic=8341.msg480084#msg480084 date=1460249448]

Let's see if any of the resonance fetishists can answer the questions successfully.

How is the resonant frequency of a wine glass determined

The resonant frequency of a wine glass is determined by the shape,size,and structure of the glass.
We can find out what the resonant frequency is by vibrating the glass using sound waves and raising the frequency of those sound waves until the vibrations of the wine glass reach a maximum amplitude.

How does a wine glass resonate, what is the mechanism

It resonates due to the deformation and reformation  of the wine glass from it's rest shape,where the resonant frequency of this deformation and reformation is determined by the shape,size and structure of the wine glass. This causes pressure wave's that can be heard-->sound waves.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a lot of moaning and groaning and shameless outright lying when it comes to the wine glass questions.  Or there will be more strutting little fake-ass peacocks flashing their phony colours and saying, "Oh, I already knew that."

Childish--as expected.

Brad

For any that are interested-->

If you wish to increase the capacity/remaining energy in your !nearly depleted! 1.5 volt batteries by up to 50% for use in your JT's,then simply squeeze them slightly in a vice-end from end,or place the negative end on a bench,and tap the positive end with a hammer a few times.
Do not tap that hard that it crushes the battery-light taps only needed-maybe 10.

P.S--make sure you insulate your vice jaws of course,so as not to short the battery.

Brad

author=MileHigh link=topic=8341.msg480084#msg480084 date=1460249448]




The resonant frequency of a wine glass is determined by the shape,size,and structure of the glass.
We can find out what the resonant frequency is by vibrating the glass using sound waves and raising the frequency of those sound waves until the vibrations of the wine glass reach a maximum amplitude.

It resonates due to the deformation and reformation  of the wine glass from it's rest shape,where the resonant frequency of this deformation and reformation is determined by the shape,size and structure of the wine glass. This causes pressure wave's that can be heard-->sound waves.

Childish--as expected.

Brad

Yup. Say we ping the wine glass on the side, that impact on the side of the glass creates an initial wave around both sides of the glass that peak on the other side of the glass and the wave travels back to the other side of the glass where it was impacted. If the wave were more dispersed, as in an off freq of the glass resonant freq then the ring, oscillation would not continue. And the liquid called glass is quite flexible at resonant freq as compared to trying to reshape it as in the glass breaking vids with a vice or a clamp. Thats for sure.

Mags

Hey Brad,

That is correct,and the yellow trace in the scope shot is measuring the columb's of charge by way of showing us a voltage trace.

But the other is measuring Current. Which is not the EMF of the Source.

That is also correct. And if we use a PM generator,the EMF produced from the stator coil will be 0 when the PM is directly at the center of the stator coil's core-where the induced magnetic field into that core is at it's greatest,but the rate of change of that magnetic flux through the core is 0,and so the EMF is also 0.

Dont agree entirely here, this is dependant on the Passive Inductance's and or Capacitance's present, or Purely Resistive, Load characteristics in the circuit.

The magnetic field is the result of current flow through a conductor.
As i said,and showed above with the generator example,the magnetic flux through the core will be at maximum when the EMF is at 0,and so the current flow will be at maximum when the rate of change of magnetic flux is 0,and the EMF will also be at 0 when the rate of change of magnetic flux is at 0.

It is not only possible, but common to see Voltage and Current in Phase, or very close to it on the Terminals of a "Generator" - Again this depends on the Load. It is also possible to see a Phase Shift of 90 Degrees as you have shown.

So no Sir, I dont agree.

See pic below.

That is correct.
But a changing magnetic field through a conductor produces an EMF in that conductor.

Yes, and this is the part that is being confused. The Magnetic Field (B): 1 Gauss = 3.335641e-10 Amperes

Again Current and the Magnetic Field are one and the same things.

The issue is, Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction, by definition, predicts EMF, Coulombs of Charge (C), a quantity measured in Volts - The E.M.F and B are Two different things.

As it stands, the equation for Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction (E.M.F = -N dϕ_B/dt), does not, at all, predict a Phase Shift of 90 Degrees between E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and the Magnetic Field (ϕ_B) or any other angle as a mater of fact between these two quantitys E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and Magnetic Field (ϕ_B)!

Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction does predict a Phase Shift of 180 Degrees, thanks to Heinrick Lenz, from the Source E.M.F and the Destination E.M.F

Yes,but it has been with a load placed on the secondary,which will then put the secondaries CEMF 180* to that of the primaries EMF,as the secondary now will have current flowing through it,and will produce it's own CEMF which is 180* from the EMF of the primary that produced it.
The primary has an EMF placed across it,and the secondary produces an EMF that apposes it-(a counter EMF-our 180* phase relationship) - but only when current flows through it.
But if the secondary is open(as it was in my schematic),then the EMF across the secondary is inline with the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the core,not the strength of the magnetic flux in the core-where maximum field strength is indicated by peak current,and maximum rate of change is indicated at the 0 volt line of the current trace.

Brad

Faraday's Law of Electromagnetic Induction does not, never will, and can not, ever, precdict the Passive Component Effects in a Circuit, Period!

Series RLC Circuit Analysis

Please compare the equations, they are not even close to the same!!!

TK was wrong and should Correct himself!!!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Wrong and wrong.

What a great explanation from you. It's as informative as the rest of your explanations.

What a great explanation from you. It's as informative as the rest of your explanations.

 

As it stands, the equation for Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction (E.M.F = -N dϕ_B/dt), does not, at all, predict a Phase Shift of 90 Degrees between E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and the Magnetic Field (ϕ_B) or any other angle as a mater of fact between these two quantitys E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and Magnetic Field (ϕ_B)!

Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction does predict a Phase Shift of 180 Degrees, thanks to Heinrick Lenz, from the Source E.M.F and the Destination E.M.F

Really Dr. Roboto?

You don't understand the implications and ramifications of the equations that you are regurgapasting.  You are just a blank copy-paste automaton.  Does phase shift really have anything to do with it, or is phase shift only used in certain circumstances as a convenient shorthand?

What if ϕ_B is 4?

What if ϕ_B is 17*(sqrt(t))?

What if ϕ_B is A*cos(omega*t)?

What if ϕ_B is K(t^3.67)?

What if ϕ_B is B*sin(omega*7t)?

Inquiring minds want to know.  Automatons need not apply.

Brad, I really feel like swearing, PW should have picked this up and done the right thing, he will know what I have said is true.

Damn even our Local Resident Clown, MileHigh should know this stuff. Many hundreds of readers here should know this stuff.

It honestly is not hard to see this massive error that TK has made!!!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

The phase relationship is really not defined,and can change in certain circumstances.
My test was at a very low frequency,and phase distortion played no part in the test.

If you and Erfinder really want to rack your brains over something,then watch my next video when i post it,and we throw faradays law of induction out the window

Chris
If you firmly believe in what your saying,then stick to your gun's,and use it as you can to your advantage. You dont need to prove anything to me,TK,or anyone else--only to yourself.
I can only provide the information i feel is true,and that just happens to be the same as the information TK provided.

Of course, the two that i asked the question in relation to induction,where either late for lunch,or did not show up at all--until all the dishes were done.

I guess some like to use conventional current flow,while others like to use true current flow.
But faradays law of induction dose not always hold true,and needs the additives and modifications-some of which you have mentioned.


Brad