[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 7.1Hz, how the heck did Tesla succeed?
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: 7.1Hz, how the heck did Tesla succeed?
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 23:26:40 -0600
- Delivered-to: testla@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <teslalist@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 23:29:18 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <1mclG.A.jZG.tye2CB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
That is only true for a linear time invariant resonant system. In such
systems bandwidth and the fraction of energy lost per cycle are equivalent.
Exactly right.
In a time variant system where say the capacitance changes over time,
durring one time frame the energy could be at one frequency and durring a
different time frame at a different frequency.
Unrelated to the lossyness of the resonator. I imagined a system that had
step changes in C when the C voltage was zero.
I think that the whole concept of Q and bandwidth is somewhat troubling
when applied to time varying systems. Certainly, the analysis it such
systems is more complex than we can deal with in a few short paragraphs on
this list.
Incidentally at either pole (and possibly other places) the Q of the earth
resonance would not be effected (assuming a circular symmetric earth as
viewed from a pole) by the equatorial bulge.
The earth isn't symmetrical that way either, especially not in EM terms.