I don't see why you would need current to shield a static electric field.Quote...My point is that the coax shield in this configuration has no effect.
I'm not convinced. I expect the coax will shield the center conductor from the induced electric field. So you would measure the same voltage whether the scope was on the left or the right side.
Does bsfeechannel’s thesis hold?
calm down children please.....
The topic was getting heated and was reported, I in turn was trying to jest in calming things down without upsetting anyone.
I am probably old enough to be your father, so don't you fucking call people you don't know children
I am probably old enough to be your father, so don't you fucking call people you don't know children
Seems, you have issues. Don't act like kid if you don't like to be labelled as such. By deleting your posts you did not act like a man at all. Attitude you show now is disgusting.
Umm, you know, when things get heated, a certain number of people always abuse the "report to moderator" button. It's their way of dealing with the emotions.
As for the mod who banned me (which I presume it's you given the timing), let me teach you a lesson in what a moderator should do. A moderator should protect the discussion, not their fragile ego. Can you point out what granted me a seven day ban, except for the fact that I responded to a silly remark in jest?
P.S.
I removed only the technical parts from my previous posts. I left all that remained.
I think you nailed it. Getting stuck to his (in)famous experiment and trying to criticize, explain, praise or debunk it, as many of us have done one way or another, turns out completely pointless.
You're right, it's about fundamental physics, and whereas I still think the experiment itself is flawed, and has led some of us to misinterpret his point at first, he probably couldn't care less.
I still think he's caused enough confusion to many - you just need to look at this endless thread - that his approach is pedagogically flawed. As I noted much earlier, his written courses are actually much clearer than the drama he tends to make with his oral lectures - at least IMO. But I know you have to keep your students attentive. Or at least "entertained"...
The good point is that this has raised a series of interesting questioning. And after all, if this was his intention, that's well done.At first, that's what I thought. Lewin was right but messed things up when trying to explain it. However after, what?, three or four months discussing about the subject, reading and re-reading papers, books, analyzing the videos, etc., and even performing experiments in my lab, I came to conclusion that the one who nailed it was exactly Lewin.
He touched on highly sensitive taboo, or myth, that is the validity of Kirchhoff's laws. Those who bash him are exactly those who consider RF, or anything Maxwell related, black magic.
I, and others, on this thread managed to realize not only how removed from understanding the basic tenet of electronics many involved with it are, but how recalcitrant they are to even try to. And this is alarming.
P.S.
I removed only the technical parts from my previous posts. I left all that remained.
This post has been shortened and cleansed to avoid upsetting other children.
Whatever was written here can be found in one or more of the following books (in no particular order, and without mentioning the usual suspects Feynman, Purcell, Griffiths, Ohanian, Jackson):
Kip
Fundamentals of Electricity and Magnetism 2nd ed
Lorrain, Courson
Electromagnetic Fields and Waves 2nd ed
John Kraus
Electromagnetism 2nd to 4th ed
Ramo, Whinnery, VanDuzer
Fields and Waves in Communication Electronics 2nd or 3rd ed
Panofsky, Phillips
Classical Electricity and Magnetism 2nd ed
Bleaney
Electricity and Magnetism 3rd ed
Nayfeh, Brussel
Electricity and Magnetism
Yes, engineers are inherently recalcitrant, they usually need to be because electronics engineering is more of an applied practical science than a theoretical science. Most practical practicing engineers rarely dive into the deeply theoretical world, they just use practical tools like Kirchhoff's to get the job done.
What would Bob Pease do...
So, ignoring Maxwell's equations has nothing to do with being practical. It is just an incapacitating feature. Deciding whether it is worthwhile learning them is a matter of choice.
Just pointing out that most practical engineers need not concern themselves with Maxwells equations (esp in a case like this) and this whole debate is all but pointless to any practical engineer. They'll just happily continue to use Kirchhoff's to make practical stuff that works, and just go "meh" to Lewin's academic argument (in this case). And there's nothing wrong with doing that, horses for courses.
I have not followed this whole thread, so I don't know about your arguments that Electroboom's claims are 100% bullshit, but I suspect that this isn't such a black and white case.
I don't think anyone doubts that Lewin is ultimately right (he is), but AFAIK he failed to address any of Electroboom's practical points.
From what I have seen, it's Lewin with his fingers in his ears repeating "KVL doesn't hold" 100 times, vs Electroboom trying to methodically evaluate the problem from a practical demonstration standpoint. From that I know who I have more respect for at the very least.
The difference of these two potentials is what we call the voltage difference, or simply the voltage V, so we have
V = −∫baE⋅ds = −∮E⋅ds.
But then you might say that the voltage is integral of E dl [i.e −∮E⋅ds] . Well, that's not true. Voltage is any energy per unit charge. Not just energy from electric sources. Hmm. Is that it? Does Dr. Lewin believe that voltage is only defined by electric forces?
So Dr. Belcher also concluded that Dr. Feynman himself and I have the same definition for voltage [...]
....
The half the whole tread is mostly just about being overly picky about the details and naming of things in physics. The thread did provide some interesting thought experiments along the way, but untimely things never got any closer to an agreement.
Circuit analysis (And that includes KVL) was never meant to be used to explain the underlying physics, but instead doing the opposite, made to abstract away any non vital parts of physics to let you focus on the operation of a circuit. If you apply circuit analysis the wrong way to your circuit then you get wrong results. Garbage in garbage out simple as that.
So if KVL is for the birds then the entirety of circuit analysis theory is for the bids as well. I'm sure any proper electronics engineer will disagree because circuit analysis has served them well ever since learning it in school.
So please circuit analysis for explaining circuits and not physics.
I also don't understand what Sredni was trying to accomplish by deleting content from his posts. Basically vandalizing his own work to make it harder for someone else to follow the tread.
I also don't understand what Sredni was trying to accomplish by deleting content from his posts. Basically vandalizing his own work to make it harder for someone else to follow the tread.
....
You continue to think being an arrogant intellectual bully who time and again resorted to petty name calling and demeaning anyone not totally agreeing with you is a credible Scientific or Engineering method. On any level and as I mentioned a long while ago would not be tolerated in most workplaces or institutions of learning.
In this thread is some great reading but so much useless non Science and Engineering and OTT Ego driven non debate.
Play the science and engineering not play the man!
Is that because I cared to study, read, read again, check, double check, watch Mehdi's videos more times than any of his own subscribes, watch Lewins videos the same number of times, just to ascertain the truth? Just because I don't want to forward misconceptions?
If you feel like others are really dumb, you are often not seeing something.
Social constructs can be difficult sometimes.
Wait a minute! Dave can say that he didn't follow the thread and that he doesn't respect Lewin based on mere impressions. I discussed the theme exhaustively, concluded, not decided, that Lewin deserves our respect and Mehdi doesn't and I am an arrogant intellectual bully?
Is that because I cared to study, read, read again, check, double check, watch Mehdi's videos more times than any of his own subscribes, watch Lewins videos the same number of times, just to ascertain the truth? Just because I don't want to forward misconceptions?
Am I a bad guy?