| General > General Technical Chat |
| Veritasium "How Electricity Actually Works" |
| << < (73/185) > >> |
| electrodacus:
--- Quote from: IanB on May 10, 2022, 05:47:12 pm ---The real issue with this thread and others like it, is that the wrong language is being used to discuss the topic under consideration--a natural language, like English. Such language is too imprecise, and subject to too much misinterpretation. To be successful, the language used needs instead to be mathematical, such as shown in this video: (The video even comes with an accidental mistake as a bonus!) --- End quote --- What was the mistake in the video ? I have not noticed any mistake. Maxwell's equations do not say that energy flows outside or inside the wires. The question is very simple and so is the answer for anyone that understand what energy is. And is not a limitation of the english language is a limitation of people not understanding what the word energy means in any context. I noticed people always confusing Power and Energy and I always wanted to do a video explaining them but I now realize the confusing is much more than just between power and energy. I always get questions (related to my business) from people asking how they can charge the Lithium battery in their RV or Boat from the vehicle alternator to compensate for times when there is less solar. My answer is always why no add more solar since cost of solar generation is about 50x less expensive than generating un using gasoline. Theyr replay is that they need to drive anyway so why not take advantage of the "free energy" from the alternator. So they think that their fuel consumption will be the same if they drive at constant speed say on highway and take or not energy from the alternator. Every kWh taken from an alternator will cost about a liter of fuel so right now here gasoline is $1.5/liter thus about $1.5/kWh vs solar panels that have a cost amortisation of just around $0.02/kWh that is 75x less (the 50x was from the time gasoline was $1 not that long ago). I use math to prove energy travels through wires and it seems it did not help convincing almost anyone here. There is absolutely no experimental proof to show energy transfer in Derek's experiment travels outside the wires. Derek just did not understood that two parallel wires form a capacitor and that is the reason he seen a current through the lamp well before electron wave had the time to travel through the wire. He did not check to see that power provided by battery is higher than power used by lamp by significant margins and that power is not wasted but stored in the capacitor formed by the wires. Then latter power provided by battery will be lower than power output at the lamp so stored energy is being discharged. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: SandyCox on May 10, 2022, 03:35:37 pm ---A photon is the elementary particle dual of an electromagnetic wave. Light is an electromagnetic wave. --- End quote --- A photon is the fundamental (quasi) particle. Photons emit em radiation, from the main central helical body of the photon. Radio waves are em radiation. EM radiation is a slab of E by H energy current. When i say slab, i mean there is no rolling E to H to E etc. Hertz was wrong. |
| TimFox:
--- Quote from: aetherist on May 10, 2022, 08:02:21 pm --- --- Quote from: SandyCox on May 10, 2022, 03:35:37 pm ---A photon is the elementary particle dual of an electromagnetic wave. Light is an electromagnetic wave. --- End quote --- A photon is the fundamental (quasi) particle. Photons emit em radiation, from the main central helical body of the photon. Radio waves are em radiation. EM radiation is a slab of E by H energy current. When i say slab, i mean there is no rolling E to H to E etc. Hertz was wrong. --- End quote --- Radio waves, as first demonstrated by Hertz, are macroscopic phenomena. Photons are microscopic. The standard derivations of E and H in the "far field" (radiation region) have been demonstrated in RF engineering over and over, to the point that they are no longer discussed. It works. In passing from the microscopic quantum domain to the macroscopic classical domain (such as Maxwell), the macroscopic quantities are the "expectation values" (q.v.) of the quantum mechanical description. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: TimFox on May 10, 2022, 08:07:19 pm --- --- Quote from: aetherist on May 10, 2022, 08:02:21 pm --- --- Quote from: SandyCox on May 10, 2022, 03:35:37 pm ---A photon is the elementary particle dual of an electromagnetic wave. Light is an electromagnetic wave. --- End quote --- A photon is the fundamental (quasi) particle. Photons emit em radiation, from the main central helical body of the photon. Radio waves are em radiation. EM radiation is a slab of E by H energy current. When i say slab, i mean there is no rolling E to H to E etc. Hertz was wrong. --- End quote --- Radio waves, as first demonstrated by Hertz, are macroscopic phenomena. Photons are microscopic. The standard derivations of E and H in the "far field" (radiation region) have been demonstrated in RF engineering over and over, to the point that they are no longer discussed. It works. In passing from the microscopic quantum domain to the macroscopic classical domain (such as Maxwell), the macroscopic quantities are the "expectation values" (q.v.) of the quantum mechanical description. --- End quote --- Natural E×H waves do not exist. Hertz was wrong. As explained by Ionel Dinu. Heaviside was correct. But non-natural manmade E×H radio waves do exist. The slab of E×H can be made (manmade) to vary in strength in a sinusoidal way. In the oldendays the manmade wave was always sinusoidal, koz of the sinusoidal mechanics used to make the wave, & hence this was easily confused with some non-existent apparition called a natural Hertzian E×H wave. And the confusion has carried over into the modern era (which will one day be called the Dark Age of Electricity)(ended by the coming of a Messiah), even tho nowadays there is no excuse, koz nowadays we can make square pulses, & yet the foolishness continues. |
| TimFox:
Fourier analysis shows that any periodic waveform can be represented as a series of sinusoidal waveforms, or an integral over a continuous frequency range of sinusoids. When building a transmitter, you will find that a sinusoidal carrier is a useful and efficient generator of radio waves. Even Marconi's evanescent waves from ratty spark waveforms contained a sinusoidal carrier, due to the resonance of the antenna system. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |