Re: Current Distribution Re: Aluminium aka Aluminum Wire (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:02:14 -0700
From: Barton B. Anderson <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Current Distribution Re: Aluminium aka Aluminum Wire (fwd)

Hi Jared,

I disagree that Paul made fundamental mistakes. Les to be mythical is 
funny to me. You mentioned that inductance only occurs in regions of 
voltage. Well, yes of course. It is current which causes the magnetic 
interaction for inductance and there is no current without a potential 
difference. Of course if there are two regions of potential, there will 
be two regions of inductance and there will be interaction between these 
two regions both inductively and capacitively dictated by their 
arrangement and proximity. The two regions will have total inductive 
affect across the entire coil. This is no different than Les. Les is an 
"equivalent" series inductance which lumps all of these "regions" 
together to derive the inductive relationship of the entire coil at it's 
resonant frequency.

All Les says is that at higher frequency, the distribution of current in 
"regions" of the winding are not the same throughout the length of the 
winding. This is nothing new to physics. Paul did not invent this (the 
physics of the universe did). Because of the current distribution along 
the length of the winding, regions along the length of the winding will 
have various inductances when comparing one region to another. Lump them 
up into a single value, and you have Les. That's all it is. It's not 
magic or a myth, it is simply a lumped value to describe the situation. 
It's simply a representation of the equivalent inductance of the coil at 
a specific frequency. It's no different than looking at two regions of 
current distribution in a half wave coil and lumping those inductances 
into their collective value.

There's really nothing here to disagree with. You can use Ldc and Cdc 
for the same frequency. Intellectually, we know that Ldc and Cdc are no 
longer "true" at the resonant frequency. Les and Ces are values to 
describe what is real at Fr. There are probably more pieces to that 
puzzle to include, but it's a very good start!

When Paul disagreed with you (early on), it is "my" opinion that it was 
not out of "foolish arrogance", but simply his understanding of physics 
versus your understanding of physics. In all my discussions with Paul, 
I've never known him to be arrogant. He would be the first to admit a 
mistake and would do it openly for all to witness. Foolish arrogance is 
just not in his nature. If you had any discussions with Paul other than 
the disagreements (which we all set back and read), you would understand 
Paul is not as you've described.

Take care,
Bart


>Nicholson made some fundamental mistakes with his analysis, there is no Fres
>or Fes
>these are entirely mythical.
>
>Inductance only occurs in regions of voltage. So for example if we have
>conditions where a half wave exists. we have two regions of inductance where
>the LC response is dictated by each region.
>
>We have pointed this out years ago and they paid no attention. ( foolish
>arrogance)
>
>Jared Dwarshuis
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>