0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I see where you are coming from but wasn't the whole point to show that an inductance has the magical property of regenerating energy? SophiecentaurThe whole point was to use the counter electromotive force from an inductive resistor. I really did not think that anyone needed to be persuaded about the properties of counter electromotive force. That has never been an issue until Jerry discounted its contribution to the experiment.
EDIT - what I'm actually asking is this. Do you know of any lead acid battery that is able to deliver a negative current flow?
Quote from: witsend on 10/06/2009 19:52:30 I see where you are coming from but wasn't the whole point to show that an inductance has the magical property of regenerating energy? SophiecentaurThe whole point was to use the counter electromotive force from an inductive resistor. I really did not think that anyone needed to be persuaded about the properties of counter electromotive force. That has never been an issue until Jerry discounted its contribution to the experiment. Yes because I believe you will get the same data with or without any inductance.
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 10/06/2009 19:56:33Quote from: witsend on 10/06/2009 19:52:30 I see where you are coming from but wasn't the whole point to show that an inductance has the magical property of regenerating energy? SophiecentaurThe whole point was to use the counter electromotive force from an inductive resistor. I really did not think that anyone needed to be persuaded about the properties of counter electromotive force. That has never been an issue until Jerry discounted its contribution to the experiment. Yes because I believe you will get the same data with or without any inductance.I think you are right. The offset depends entirely on the duty cycle, in the end. It's a matter of peak to mean ratio, I think.Amongst other things, it isn't clear what the duty cycle is for the waveform when it settles down to its free running condition (at the higher frequency). The spikes would be very narrow, compared with the 5μs which I understand was the period of oscillation. The time constant associated with the 10μH inductor and the 100pF of the Mosfet is 10^-13s but the speed of operation is, I think 1V/ns - which implies pulses in the order of 20ns width. That could imply a duty cycle in the region of 20ns/5μs or less than 1/100. Plenty of opportunity for a huge peak to mean ratio or "over unity".
I've copied this from another thread. Hope it's allowed.You have over one million physicists in the world today. You have the brightest minds, the best memories, the greatest team efforts. Who could compete with that?Jerrygg38I can. And I don't have brains. I just have an edge. So does everyone who tries to work out problems for themselves. If you only hear one side of an argument there's no discussion. The trained scientist has only heard one side of an argument supported, he believes by empirical proof. Well. I of all people know how anxious the scientific community are to test their hypotheses Laws, and general paradigms. I have seen how happy they are to look at empirical proof in experimental data. I have a really, really simple electric circuit that repeatedly delivers energy efficiencies that boggle the mind and blow the unity barrier into the dark ages. If empirical proof is everything - then go and test it.Read through the thread again on that circuit. Where did all that critical arrogance come from? I only asked people to check some numbers out. And the sad part is - THAT reaction is typical. Par for the course. It seems that one can question anything in this world today. We've finally enjoyed a sort of inalienable, international, constitutional right to speak our minds. We can question the existence of God. We can question the wisdom of our leaders. And we can even question justice. These are really subtle things that call for really subtle concepts and absurdly abstract qualifications. And very often they reach into the actual soul structure of a person, they matter so much. So it also tests ones tolerance. But DO NOT DARE QUESTION A SCIENTIST. Then objectivity flies out the window and you get a display of testosterone more typically confined to bulls in a rutting season. Fortunately there are also those out there who still like to look at alternative ideas. I just wish they'd also look at alternative experiments.
This forum is for the discussion of complex theories. It is not for the discussion of technical high school such as Brooklyn Tech HS or Community college level circuit discussions.
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 16/06/2009 13:57:44This forum is for the discussion of complex theories. It is not for the discussion of technical high school such as Brooklyn Tech HS or Community college level circuit discussions. I disagree - this forum is for discussion of science, scientists, technology and engineering at whatever level people require. You may not wish to discuss such things, but please don't speak for the forum as a whole...
We can question the wisdom of our leaders. And we can even question justice. These are really subtle things that call for really subtle concepts and absurdly abstract qualifications. And very often they reach into the actual soul structure of a person, they matter so much. So it also tests ones tolerance. But DO NOT DARE QUESTION A SCIENTIST. Then objectivity flies out the window and you get a display of testosterone more typically confined to bulls in a rutting season.
Interesting; I just checked it out; maybe witsend is a member.
No. I'm not a member - but I know there's a forum - somewhere - that's got threads on my circuit. It's great. Really entertaining reading. But I can't for the life of me find it again. If I do I'll let you know.