A.C. Generator

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > A.C. Generator

Page 1 of 2

A.C. Generator16-10-2021 09:12
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Can anyone explain to me how the polyphase Tesla used which can be 3 phase allows for opposing fields not to be disruptive? With D.C. current, all phases are synchronous and follow one after the other. With Tesla, Every 60º the phase changes so that each phase has an opposing polarity. And yet this allows each 120º phase to oppose the other phases. Does this mean that when they run congruently that they have 2 fields with a neutral ground? Is that why 220 volt supply is wired in such a way? If so, this goes back to 1887 and yet is what industrial electrical energy supply today is based upon. Can anyone clarify this for me? I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
16-10-2021 17:24
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: Can anyone explain to me how the polyphase Tesla used which can be 3 phase allows for opposing fields not to be disruptive? They are separate circuits. James___ wrote: With D.C. current, all phases are synchronous and follow one after the other. There is no phase in DC. James___ wrote: With Tesla, Every 60º the phase changes so that each phase has an opposing polarity. 60 degrees is not opposition. James___ wrote: And yet this allows each 120º phase to oppose the other phases. 120 degrees is not opposition. James___ wrote: Does this mean that when they run congruently that they have 2 fields with a neutral ground? Three fields...each at 0, 60, and 120 degrees. There is no such thing as a neutral ground in this kind of generator. James___ wrote: Is that why 220 volt supply is wired in such a way? Transformers...a completely different part of the electrical generating and distribution system. It's that gray can you see on power poles. Most power poles have three wires (the highest wires on the pole) that are the secondary distribution lines coming from a nearby substation. They carry the three phases at 7.2kv. There is no ground, other than what you are standing on. Slightly lower you will often see another wire (not always!). That wire is grounded at the substation. It's there to help the power crews maintain the line. That gray can sitting on the pole is a transformer. It converts the 7.2kv three phase power to a typical home, providing biphase 240/120v power. This has a center tap on the secondary of this transformer. There is 120v from the center tap to either side of the winding. The entire secondary winding is 240v. All three wires (both sides of the winding and the centertap) are brought into your home service entrance (the watt-hour meter and your fusebox). At this point, a metal stake some 6 to 8 feet long is driven into the ground until it's just a few inches showing. A wire is connected to this. This fourth wire is also brought into your fuse box (also known as a distribution panel). That's the thing in your house where all the circuit breakers or fuses are. So you have: 240v brought into either side, with 120v to the neutral wire. That neutral wire is NOT ground. You can get shocked by it. Ground is provided by that stake driven into the ground at the service entrance. That stake is an electrode driven right into the earth near where stand while using your electricity. Ground is wired to casings of electrical equipment, including each junction box, including the ones containing a switch or an outlet. It is that third conductor on the outlet. It protects you should a defect allow a neutral or power wire touch the case. The circuit breaker or fuse will blow, shutting off the power. On older systems, ground was still provided to the distribution panel, but never went further. In that system, electrical cases are 'floating'. They simply aren't connected to anything. If a neutral or power wire touches that case through a defect, you WILL get shocked. James___ wrote: If so, this goes back to 1887 and yet is what industrial electrical energy supply today is based upon. Can anyone clarify this for me? I would appreciate your thoughts on this. You can read about each component in generating electrical power and getting it to your outlet, and how it works right on the web. There are even many a youtube video of it. Some of it you do need to have some understanding of electronics, but that can be learned too. The level of electronics here is pretty basic, but you do have to understand AC circuitry in general, including the effects of inductors, capacitors, resistors, transformers, and wire on them. BTW, each substation is doing the same kind of thing as that can on the power pole is doing. Each is connected to the high voltage transmission line as it's service entrance (anywhere from 250kv to 800kv), it has fuses and circuit breakers just like your home (just larger!). It's secondary line is the distribution line that you see on common power poles everywhere serving each home (7.2kv). Each home is connected to that distribution line by that gray metal can (some are green!). Typically, if you look a that can up there, you will see the 7.2kv wire feeding it go through a kind of loop with a straight section. That's a fuse. When they blow, it sounds like a gunshot. Some businesses and farms use all three phases as is, using a different kind of transformer on the pole (it still looks like a gray can, the writing on the can describes what kind of transformer it is). These places receive all three wires on their service entrance. There is no neutral. All three wires are 'hot'. That same ground stake provides the only ground. Referenced to that, each 'hot' lead is 120v. There is 208v between each phase. Voltage appears between each hot lead. It is caused by the different phases at any instant. It is this voltage that runs between windings on a motor, for example. The advantage of 3 phase power is that induction motors do not need a capacitor and starter winding to start them, like biphase induction motors do. Lights don't care. So long as they get their rated voltage, they work. You can always convert 3 phase power to biphase power using another transformer. It is transformers that convert the generator output voltage up to the 800kv transmission line voltage. It is transformers that convert it back down to 7.2kv for distribution lines, and again to 240/120v for your home. Every generator connected to the electrical grid has governor in it controlling it's frequency and phase. All generators must 'push' and 'pull' at the same time. They are all in sync with each other. Each generating station monitors what the power line is doing and matches their own generator to be in phase with it. This must happen BEFORE that generator is ever connected to the grid. While connected, that generator is continually adjusted to maintain sync with the rest of the grid. Generators today are that same old dynamo invented by Tesla, who became very rich from this invention and it's associated circuitry (the grid). Together, Westinghouse and Tesla put the old Edison Electric system to oblivion. Edison Electric likewise was forced to buy Tesla's AC system or go out of business. The War of the Currents was a nasty one, filled with propaganda by Edison himself, while he tried to protect his DC system. Kind of like Microsoft and Linux recently, with Microsoft losing out to Linux. Microsoft is seeing a smaller market share for Windows with each passing year, just like Edison's DC system did...until it was gone. Edison's DC system failed because there is no easy way to use high voltage to distribute power and convert that to a convenient lower voltage for users of that power. With Tesla's AC system, that matter is solved most elegantly using the transformer. Tesla, an inventor at heart, took his riches and broke off to build his own laboratories to continue his inventing. None of his inventions ever had the success of the dynamo. THAT's what put him in the poorhouse. I recommend you take the time to learn some basic electronics, especially that concerning AC circuits, and study up on how each component of the electrical generating and distribution system (the grid) works. Despite the scary looking 'tangle of wire' you see at a typical substation or inside your own distribution panel, it is really very simple, if you look at it step by step. Even a generating plant, which has racks of equipment filled with electronics and wiring, will make more sense. Those racks are just the control systems for the plant itself, and the frequency and phase governors for the generators. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 16-10-2021 17:30
16-10-2021 19:16
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	A.C. isn't really a field I enjoy. I mostly just know enough to avoid getting shocked, while doing repairs, and what needs to be done to make it work. I do circuit board work mostly. Tesla's patents are online, and go into a lot of detail. I'm not real sure what James wanted, that he couldn't find online. The war between Tesla and Edison is well documented as well. Both put a lot of effort in selling their systems, since they both had more than just money riding on which system won out. Tesla had to educate more people on how his system worked, and why it was vastly superior. Had Edison won, we would have needed power plants every couple of miles. Think of all that man-made CO2 generated as well... The A.C. and D.C. systems weren't comparable at the time. No practical way to convert from one to the other. Light bulbs didn't care, but motors were D.C. Tesla invented the A.C. motor, and quite a few other things to go with his system. Tesla wasn't motivate purely for profit, like Edison was, so he didn't spare any detail, or try to keep any key point secret. It was an epic battle that changed the world. Should be all kinds of easy to understand information online, videos. Something James spends a lot of time, better spent on his gravity wheel. My interest in Tesla started in high school, when I read an article in Radio-Electronics, about his high voltage experiments. Man made lightning... Shortly after college, I ordered a kit, and built a 250kV Tesla coil. I got 8-10 inch arcs, and had a lot of fun playing. Unfortunately, it's rough on digital electronics in the house, and suspected it had something to do with the failure of computers and TVs... Haven't used the Tesla coil in a couple decades now. Of course, I read everything I could find about Tesla's work He had a lot of other interesting ideas and inventions. It was amazing, considering the technology, tools and materials available at the time.
17-10-2021 00:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	HarveyH55 wrote: A.C. isn't really a field I enjoy. I mostly just know enough to avoid getting shocked, while doing repairs, and what needs to be done to make it work. I do circuit board work mostly. Heh. Fortunately, the good folks that built the electrical generating and distribution system, and the electrician that initially wired your home made what you do a lot safer! HarveyH55 wrote: Tesla's patents are online, and go into a lot of detail. I'm not real sure what James wanted, that he couldn't find online. The war between Tesla and Edison is well documented as well. Both put a lot of effort in selling their systems, since they both had more than just money riding on which system won out. Tesla had to educate more people on how his system worked, and why it was vastly superior. Had Edison won, we would have needed power plants every couple of miles. Which is precisely why Edison lost. HarveyH55 wrote: Think of all that man-made CO2 generated as well... The A.C. and D.C. systems weren't comparable at the time. No practical way to convert from one to the other. Light bulbs didn't care, but motors were D.C. Tesla invented the A.C. motor, and quite a few other things to go with his system. Tesla wasn't motivate purely for profit, like Edison was, so he didn't spare any detail, or try to keep any key point secret. It was an epic battle that changed the world. That it was. The War of the Currents resulted in Edison's DC system, which was first, being completely abandoned. HarveyH55 wrote: Should be all kinds of easy to understand information online, videos. Something James spends a lot of time, better spent on his gravity wheel. There is. HarveyH55 wrote: My interest in Tesla started in high school, when I read an article in Radio-Electronics, about his high voltage experiments. Man made lightning... Shortly after college, I ordered a kit, and built a 250kV Tesla coil. I got 8-10 inch arcs, and had a lot of fun playing. Unfortunately, it's rough on digital electronics in the house, and suspected it had something to do with the failure of computers and TVs... Heh. It IS an arc. Arcs kinda do that. Arc welders can cause the same problem. I have to deal with this in my instrumentation that gets installed in industrial environments. Someone's almost always welding on something near the communications line and power line connected to that instrument. There are ways to deal with it, but you have to know what you're doing. Even the sparks generated by the magnetos and the voltage regulator of an aircraft can be a real problem. It can render an aircraft radio useless due to arc noise. These systems have to be properly shielded. It's not as easy as it looks. HarveyH55 wrote: Haven't used the Tesla coil in a couple decades now. Of course, I read everything I could find about Tesla's work He had a lot of other interesting ideas and inventions. It was amazing, considering the technology, tools and materials available at the time. That it was. Tesla really showed just what a transformer can do! The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
17-10-2021 04:00
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: With D.C. current, all phases are synchronous and follow one after the other. There is no phase in DC. I'm still wrestling with the concept of synchronicity being applied to a phase. Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote:With Tesla, Every 60º the phase changes so that each phase has an opposing polarity. 60 degrees is not opposition. I'm still wondering about the phase changing a certain number of degrees every time it changes a certain number of degrees. How does it change that certain number of degrees if it hasn't changed that number of degrees? Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote:And yet this allows each 120º phase to oppose the other phases. 120 degrees is not opposition. I'm still wrestling with the notion that a certain number of degrees is what allows each 120º phase to oppose the other phases. Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote:Does this mean that when they run congruently that they have 2 fields with a neutral ground? Three fields...each at 0, 60, and 120 degrees. There is no such thing as a neutral ground in this kind of generator. I'm still wrestling with the idea that "congruently" means "concurrently." .

17-10-2021 07:01
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: With D.C. current, all phases are synchronous and follow one after the other. There is no phase in DC. I'm still wrestling with the concept of synchronicity being applied to a phase. What? You can't see it? Attached image:
17-10-2021 07:11
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Into the Night wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: A.C. isn't really a field I enjoy. I mostly just know enough to avoid getting shocked, while doing repairs, and what needs to be done to make it work. I do circuit board work mostly. Heh. Fortunately, the good folks that built the electrical generating and distribution system, and the electrician that initially wired your home made what you do a lot safer! HarveyH55 wrote: Tesla's patents are online, and go into a lot of detail. I'm not real sure what James wanted, that he couldn't find online. The war between Tesla and Edison is well documented as well. Both put a lot of effort in selling their systems, since they both had more than just money riding on which system won out. Tesla had to educate more people on how his system worked, and why it was vastly superior. Had Edison won, we would have needed power plants every couple of miles. Which is precisely why Edison lost. HarveyH55 wrote: Think of all that man-made CO2 generated as well... The A.C. and D.C. systems weren't comparable at the time. No practical way to convert from one to the other. Light bulbs didn't care, but motors were D.C. Tesla invented the A.C. motor, and quite a few other things to go with his system. Tesla wasn't motivate purely for profit, like Edison was, so he didn't spare any detail, or try to keep any key point secret. It was an epic battle that changed the world. That it was. The War of the Currents resulted in Edison's DC system, which was first, being completely abandoned. HarveyH55 wrote: Should be all kinds of easy to understand information online, videos. Something James spends a lot of time, better spent on his gravity wheel. There is. HarveyH55 wrote: My interest in Tesla started in high school, when I read an article in Radio-Electronics, about his high voltage experiments. Man made lightning... Shortly after college, I ordered a kit, and built a 250kV Tesla coil. I got 8-10 inch arcs, and had a lot of fun playing. Unfortunately, it's rough on digital electronics in the house, and suspected it had something to do with the failure of computers and TVs... Heh. It IS an arc. Arcs kinda do that. Arc welders can cause the same problem. I have to deal with this in my instrumentation that gets installed in industrial environments. Someone's almost always welding on something near the communications line and power line connected to that instrument. There are ways to deal with it, but you have to know what you're doing. Even the sparks generated by the magnetos and the voltage regulator of an aircraft can be a real problem. It can render an aircraft radio useless due to arc noise. These systems have to be properly shielded. It's not as easy as it looks. HarveyH55 wrote: Haven't used the Tesla coil in a couple decades now. Of course, I read everything I could find about Tesla's work He had a lot of other interesting ideas and inventions. It was amazing, considering the technology, tools and materials available at the time. That it was. Tesla really showed just what a transformer can do! My Tesla coil is relatively safe. There is some danger in the primary part, but the output is safe. It's high voltage, but really low current. And at a really high frequency. It can cause burns, if not careful. It doesn't really give an electric shock, but still doesn't feel good. Sort of like thousands of bugs crawling al over your arm.
17-10-2021 07:51
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote:What? You can't see it? Don't you even know what it is? I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-10-2021 16:06
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	The 3 phase synchronicity is found when the amplitude of 2 sine waves have the opposite potential of the 3rd sine wave. I was hoping you guys knew how to understand how a basic graph is written. A basic explanation is y = a sin (bx+c). With 3 sine waves, 2 of the sine waves would be shifted which would mean having a + or - after what's in the parenthesis. This would shift the point of origin from (0, 0) (x, y) to a value that is either -x or +x but it cannot be 0. And as we all know, 2 * sqrt2/2 = 1. Basically the values of both the +y and the -y always = 1. With DC current, it would have 1 sine wave so its amplitude would not be as consistent. And from here we would get into is it 50 or 60 Hz which are the 2 most common frequencies of electrical generation. This is where getting into the sine wave that generates the frequency of the output power supply is getting into the nitty gritty. I guess the basic answer about synchronicity is answered when both y and -y is always 1 when the function of the 3 different sinewaves change within the current. This property is what would allow for A.C. current to be stepped up and transmitted over great distances. Thanks for helping me to understand this guys. It does get into other things but with possible inventions in mind, better not to discuss those things. Attached image:
17-10-2021 17:20
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote:The 3 phase synchronicity is found when the amplitude of 2 sine waves have the opposite potential of the 3rd sine wave. So no phase is changing,right? All phases remain constant, right? Did you mean to write "trigonometric" or "amplitude" synchronicity of sine waves? If so, you misspelled a few words. There is no synchronicity of static things and if all phases are remaining static, they cannot have any synchronicity. I'm glad I could help. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-10-2021 18:26
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:The 3 phase synchronicity is found when the amplitude of 2 sine waves have the opposite potential of the 3rd sine wave. So no phase is changing,right? All phases remain constant, right? Did you mean to write "trigonometric" or "amplitude" synchronicity of sine waves? If so, you misspelled a few words. There is no synchronicity of static things and if all phases are remaining static, they cannot have any synchronicity. I'm glad I could help. . If you consider that 1Hz is 1 cycle, within that cycle, each wave creates a change in the field while the amplitude of the current remains constant. This means that each sine wave is synchronous with the other 2 sine waves. basically there is a wave within each cycle. But as the 3 sine waves are viewed, it is from a 2 dimensional and not a 3 dimensional perspective. This is an example of how 3 sinewaves can create a sinewave. And when 2 waves are sqrt2/2, they're acting together so the sinewave that is either 1 or -1 has an equally opposing affect. This is probably why A.C. current is cohesive while D.C. current isn't. With D.C. current, it has a lot of entropy. Attached image: Edited on 17-10-2021 19:01
17-10-2021 20:36
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote:If you consider that 1Hz is 1 cycle, Nope. 1 Hz is one cycle per second. 1 Hz is a rate. 1 Hz is for all the cycles. James___ wrote: ... within [a given] cycle, each wave creates a change in the field while the amplitude of the current remains constant. So what you meant to say all along is that the sine waves are of the same frequency, which never changes within the context of this discussion, but are of differing, but constant, phases that never change within the context of this discussion, yes? So what you meant to say all along is that there is amplitude synchronicity, not phase synchronicity, right? James___ wrote: This means that each sine wave is synchronous with the other 2 sine waves. ... based on amplitude, not phase, right? Their individual phases never change, right? The synchronitcity lies in the amplitude which constantly changes as a sine wave, right? James___ wrote: basically there is a wave within each cycle. That is the definition of a cycle. James___ wrote: But as the 3 sine waves are viewed, it is from a 2 dimensional and not a 3 dimensional perspective. If you are having trouble visualizing it in 3-D, I can help with that. This animation is totally Harvey-friendly, weighing in at only 420K. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-10-2021 21:08
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	HarveyH55 wrote: Into the Night wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: A.C. isn't really a field I enjoy. I mostly just know enough to avoid getting shocked, while doing repairs, and what needs to be done to make it work. I do circuit board work mostly. Heh. Fortunately, the good folks that built the electrical generating and distribution system, and the electrician that initially wired your home made what you do a lot safer! HarveyH55 wrote: Tesla's patents are online, and go into a lot of detail. I'm not real sure what James wanted, that he couldn't find online. The war between Tesla and Edison is well documented as well. Both put a lot of effort in selling their systems, since they both had more than just money riding on which system won out. Tesla had to educate more people on how his system worked, and why it was vastly superior. Had Edison won, we would have needed power plants every couple of miles. Which is precisely why Edison lost. HarveyH55 wrote: Think of all that man-made CO2 generated as well... The A.C. and D.C. systems weren't comparable at the time. No practical way to convert from one to the other. Light bulbs didn't care, but motors were D.C. Tesla invented the A.C. motor, and quite a few other things to go with his system. Tesla wasn't motivate purely for profit, like Edison was, so he didn't spare any detail, or try to keep any key point secret. It was an epic battle that changed the world. That it was. The War of the Currents resulted in Edison's DC system, which was first, being completely abandoned. HarveyH55 wrote: Should be all kinds of easy to understand information online, videos. Something James spends a lot of time, better spent on his gravity wheel. There is. HarveyH55 wrote: My interest in Tesla started in high school, when I read an article in Radio-Electronics, about his high voltage experiments. Man made lightning... Shortly after college, I ordered a kit, and built a 250kV Tesla coil. I got 8-10 inch arcs, and had a lot of fun playing. Unfortunately, it's rough on digital electronics in the house, and suspected it had something to do with the failure of computers and TVs... Heh. It IS an arc. Arcs kinda do that. Arc welders can cause the same problem. I have to deal with this in my instrumentation that gets installed in industrial environments. Someone's almost always welding on something near the communications line and power line connected to that instrument. There are ways to deal with it, but you have to know what you're doing. Even the sparks generated by the magnetos and the voltage regulator of an aircraft can be a real problem. It can render an aircraft radio useless due to arc noise. These systems have to be properly shielded. It's not as easy as it looks. HarveyH55 wrote: Haven't used the Tesla coil in a couple decades now. Of course, I read everything I could find about Tesla's work He had a lot of other interesting ideas and inventions. It was amazing, considering the technology, tools and materials available at the time. That it was. Tesla really showed just what a transformer can do! My Tesla coil is relatively safe. There is some danger in the primary part, but the output is safe. It's high voltage, but really low current. And at a really high frequency. It can cause burns, if not careful. It doesn't really give an electric shock, but still doesn't feel good. Sort of like thousands of bugs crawling al over your arm. No, it's not really safe. Yes, the current is low, but it IS current, and it can be high enough to cause a real problem if you get across it. Electrically, you're worth about a 100 ohm resistor, fingertip to fingertip (depending on contact resistivity). All it takes is a mA or two crossing your heart for more than a second or two to kill you. In some cases, a single pulse can stop your heart. Tesla coils also have been known to start fires. The frequency helps you. The most lethal frequencies are around 50hz (pretty damn close to the US power frequency of 60Hz. Higher frequencies tend to not travel through the body, but along the surface (something known in electronics as 'skin effect', which affects all conductors at higher frequency, including you). The coil you made is probably pretty small by comparison. Larger versions can be quite lethal. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
17-10-2021 21:12
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:If you consider that 1Hz is 1 cycle, Nope. 1 Hz is one cycle per second. 1 Hz is a rate. 1 Hz is for all the cycles. James___ wrote: ... within [a given] cycle, each wave creates a change in the field while the amplitude of the current remains constant. So what you meant to say all along is that the sine waves are of the same frequency, which never changes within the context of this discussion, but are of differing, but constant, phases that never change within the context of this discussion, yes? So what you meant to say all along is that there is amplitude synchronicity, not phase synchronicity, right? James___ wrote: This means that each sine wave is synchronous with the other 2 sine waves. ... based on amplitude, not phase, right? Their individual phases never change, right? The synchronitcity lies in the amplitude which constantly changes as a sine wave, right? James___ wrote: basically there is a wave within each cycle. That is the definition of a cycle. James___ wrote: But as the 3 sine waves are viewed, it is from a 2 dimensional and not a 3 dimensional perspective. If you are having trouble visualizing it in 3-D, I can help with that. This animation is totally Harvey-friendly, weighing in at only 420K. . Nice animation, but it is only serving to confuse poor James again. The basic confusion he is having is that he still doesn't understand there are three separate circuits. You can pick any one of them can call that zero degrees. The others are 60 deg and 120 deg from that. It not all on one wire. He's also confused about the concept of entropy. He doesn't know what it is. He's also confused about what the word 'opposite' means. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 17-10-2021 21:14
17-10-2021 21:51
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:If you consider that 1Hz is 1 cycle, Nope. 1 Hz is one cycle per second. 1 Hz is a rate. 1 Hz is for all the cycles. James___ wrote: ... within [a given] cycle, each wave creates a change in the field while the amplitude of the current remains constant. So what you meant to say all along is that the sine waves are of the same frequency, which never changes within the context of this discussion, but are of differing, but constant, phases that never change within the context of this discussion, yes? So what you meant to say all along is that there is amplitude synchronicity, not phase synchronicity, right? James___ wrote: This means that each sine wave is synchronous with the other 2 sine waves. ... based on amplitude, not phase, right? Their individual phases never change, right? The synchronitcity lies in the amplitude which constantly changes as a sine wave, right? James___ wrote: basically there is a wave within each cycle. That is the definition of a cycle. James___ wrote: But as the 3 sine waves are viewed, it is from a 2 dimensional and not a 3 dimensional perspective. If you are having trouble visualizing it in 3-D, I can help with that. This animation is totally Harvey-friendly, weighing in at only 420K. . That's a pretty good animation. Any chance for the sine waves that are light blue could be made using different colors? It's interesting to think about it but 3 phase A.C. would have 6 waves per cycle. It might be easier to think of it as the current wobbling. It's like the Earth and the Moon wobble in their orbit around the Sun. This is because the center of force between the Earth and the Moon shifts relative to their distance from the Sun. And each New Moon could be considered as 1 cycle. It's be the same thing with A.C. current.

17-10-2021 22:09
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:If you consider that 1Hz is 1 cycle, Nope. 1 Hz is one cycle per second. 1 Hz is a rate. 1 Hz is for all the cycles. James___ wrote: ... within [a given] cycle, each wave creates a change in the field while the amplitude of the current remains constant. So what you meant to say all along is that the sine waves are of the same frequency, which never changes within the context of this discussion, but are of differing, but constant, phases that never change within the context of this discussion, yes? So what you meant to say all along is that there is amplitude synchronicity, not phase synchronicity, right? James___ wrote: This means that each sine wave is synchronous with the other 2 sine waves. ... based on amplitude, not phase, right? Their individual phases never change, right? The synchronitcity lies in the amplitude which constantly changes as a sine wave, right? James___ wrote: basically there is a wave within each cycle. That is the definition of a cycle. James___ wrote: But as the 3 sine waves are viewed, it is from a 2 dimensional and not a 3 dimensional perspective. If you are having trouble visualizing it in 3-D, I can help with that. This animation is totally Harvey-friendly, weighing in at only 420K. . That's a pretty good animation. Any chance for the sine waves that are light blue could be made using different colors? It's interesting to think about it but 3 phase A.C. would have 6 waves per cycle. It might be easier to think of it as the current wobbling. It's like the Earth and the Moon wobble in their orbit around the Sun. This is because the center of force between the Earth and the Moon shifts relative to their distance from the Sun. And each New Moon could be considered as 1 cycle. It's be the same thing with A.C. current. To IBdaMann: QED The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-10-2021 03:57
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Edited on 18-10-2021 04:00
18-10-2021 04:16
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion?
18-10-2021 04:33
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote: That's a pretty good animation. Any chance for the sine waves that are light blue could be made using different colors? That was actually my first thought but that would require a lot of work and I just wanted to quickly get something out there in response to your post ... so I just threw this one together. The technique I used to blend three sine waves together did the job but it was hell on the colors. This is the original: ... and this is the Harvey-friendly merged product that I threw together in about fifteen minutes roughly (so I'll take the hit on the low quality): James___ wrote:It's interesting to think about it but 3 phase A.C. would have 6 waves per cycle. Each sine wave has only one wave per cycle. It's the definition of a cycle, i.e. one wave. James___ wrote: It might be easier to think of it as the current wobbling. Waves don't wobble and they don't fall down. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-10-2021 04:33
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. Mutual phase repels itself which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. Attached image: Edited on 18-10-2021 04:46
18-10-2021 04:54
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	With the armature of a D.C. generator, it's not a solid set of windings like its field coils. This is possibly what generates to homogeneous of a current. Edited on 18-10-2021 04:55
18-10-2021 04:55
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. Mutual phase repels itself which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. The magnet field is weak, and not worth worrying about. I do have a gadget that will detect current, without touching any wires. Got to be close though, inch or less maybe. Only works with A.C. though. Pretty handy, not having to use a meter to check an outlet or light socket.
18-10-2021 05:03
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. Mutual phase repels itself which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. The magnet field is weak, and not worth worrying about. I do have a gadget that will detect current, without touching any wires. Got to be close though, inch or less maybe. Only works with A.C. though. Pretty handy, not having to use a meter to check an outlet or light socket. You are aware that trains travel at over 200 mph because of magnetic fields? 2 minutes to 200 mph and 268 mph once moving. We discussed this in the thread about quantum computers because they operate at near absolute temperatures. Did you miss that thread? It could be said the difference between D.C. and A.C. current is what led to other uses of electrical currents and the magnetic fields they generate. A mag-Lev train operates on the principle of opposing electrical currents. Instead of attraction as with the A.C. current, the fields are synchronous to have the same and not an opposing polarity. A D.C. current simply isn't polarized.
18-10-2021 05:08
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote:Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? Entropy never decreases. James___ wrote: To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Every photon is a virtual black hole with its own event horizon. That's why photons cannot emit any light. Don't get one stuck to you or you'll never get it off. James___ wrote: Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. The reason for the application of the inverse square law is that the same amount of energy is continually distributed over a wider and wider area ... which is squared because it is area. James___ wrote: Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because ... ... because the Inverse Square Law is not the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. They are different laws, believe it or not. AC current never suffers entropy; however, the closed system in which the AC current performs work does, and it does so according to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. James___ wrote: So which argument was proven? Proofs are proved. Performance is proven. Venus is probed. Arguments are supported. Stockrooms are supplied. Leaders are supplanted. I'm glad I could help. You're most welcome. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-10-2021 05:20
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? Entropy never decreases. James___ wrote: To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Every photon is a virtual black hole with its own event horizon. That's why photons cannot emit any light. Don't get one stuck to you or you'll never get it off. James___ wrote: Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. The reason for the application of the inverse square law is that the same amount of energy is continually distributed over a wider and wider area ... which is squared because it is area. James___ wrote: Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because ... ... because the Inverse Square Law is not the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. They are different laws, believe it or not. AC current never suffers entropy; however, the closed system in which the AC current performs work does, and it does so according to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. James___ wrote: So which argument was proven? Proofs are proved. Performance is proven. Venus is probed. Arguments are supported. Stockrooms are supplied. Leaders are supplanted. I'm glad I could help. You're most welcome. . And to salute Harvey, tomorrow I might buy a half pint of Jack Daniels which is made in a dry county in Tennessee. That's kind of like what you said, right? Some of your argument is well said. I do have to ask you, have you been hanging out with that Harvey again? p.s., Jack Daniels is 80 proof. Is that the proof you want? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPO76Jlnz6c If you listen to the song, you could say they understand that in life, we play the hand that we are dealt. p.s.s., tomorrow night I will have sum fun. Pun intended. Edited on 18-10-2021 05:52
18-10-2021 06:17
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	To give you guys an idea, the inverse power rule is wrong. I am letting you guys now ahead of time what I will be ranting about that is incomprehensible. The attached image is an example. 1/4 to the negative 1st power is not 4. And corn whiskey from a church going community will help me to deal with my personal issues. I shouldn't burden ya'all with this trifling B.S. but to please Harvey, jes tryin' 2 B a friend, okay? Attached image: Edited on 18-10-2021 06:21
18-10-2021 06:25
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	The same problem in its other form. And it has the same answer. p.s., this is a proof that changing how a problem is factored still doesn't give the correct answer. p.s.s., I'll give the correct answer tomorrow. Attached image: Edited on 18-10-2021 06:28
18-10-2021 14:07
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	With the inverse power, they say 4 written as a fraction is 4/1 which it is. When it is 4/1^1 (to the negative first power), 1/4 is the opposite or inverse of 4. To consider 1/4^-1 was inverted to 4. With the images, the problem that was written is off to the right. https://photos.app.goo.gl/WQDhZ1uzKtNYvb4P7 But with https://photos.app.goo.gl/pvr3kfsjbeMc1mwS8 4^2 (4 squared or 4 times 4) is 16. That is the result of a function which in this instance was multiplication. 1/4^-1 becoming 4 is not the result of a function. Does this matter? Not really because people are taught it's the right way and that's about all that matters. If change was the result of function then 1/4^-1 would be 1/4 divided by 1/4 = 1. Division is the inverse of multiplication but as shown in the images, using an inverse function can change a number without it being the result of a function (multiplication or division). p.s., both expressions using an exponent has the same result when a fraction is being considered. Edited on 18-10-2021 14:17
18-10-2021 14:07
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	@Harvey, the difference between myself and you is that I worked to change my life but I wasn't allowed to. It will come out sounding odd when I say that Christians have fought against me because because I am a disabled Veteran. While I served the U.S., they serve God so they trumped me (pun intended because it's about having the power). And as you said, the Constitution doesn't give a person the right to pursue their own life, it's only a suggestion in the preamble. After all, only the Bill of Rights is acknowledged as giving people rights. This is from the 2nd paragraph in the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript Sadly, Christians (and many Americans) do not acknowledge that the founding Fathers of America believed that God endowed people with the right to pursue their own life. And that is one of the founding principles of the U.S. but is not one that Christians accept. Edited on 18-10-2021 15:04
18-10-2021 17:20
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14406)	James___ wrote:To give you guys an idea, the inverse power rule is wrong. I didn't know there was a "rule" by that name. James___ wrote: 1/4 to the negative 1st power is not 4. Yes it is. It's not so much a rule as it is a definition (of notation). Writing [1/4]^-1 is just another way of writing 1/[1/4] ... which equals 4 because there are four one-fourths in the value "1". James___ wrote:With the inverse power, they say 4 written as a fraction is 4/1 which it is. It's not a fraction. It's a ratio. A fraction is a value between 0 and 1. James___ wrote:When it is 4/1^1 (to the negative first power), 1/4 is the opposite or inverse of 4. "1/4" is the multiplicative inverse of "4" and vice versa. James___ wrote:4^2 (4 squared or 4 times 4) is 16. That is the result of a function ... It is the result of a mathematical operation. James___ wrote: 1/4^-1 becoming 4 is not the result of a function. 1/4^-1 does not become 4. 1/4^-1 is, by definition, another way of writing "4." It's all in the definition of that little exponent notation. James___ wrote: If change was the result of function then 1/4^-1 would be 1/4 divided by 1/4 = 1. Not quite. Your base is always the number "1". You then multiply or divide by the specified value as indicated by the exponent. For example: VALUE^2 = 1 * VALUE^2 = 1 * VALUE * VALUE [i.e. you multiply by VALUE twice] VALUE^0 = 1 * VALUE^0 = 1 [and you multiply by VALUE zero times] VALUE^5 / VALUE^5 = VALUE^(5-5) = VALUE^0 = 1 VALUE^-3 = 1 / VALUE^3 = 1 / [VALUE * VALUE * VALUE] VALUE^[2/3] = 1 * VALUE^[2/3] = CUBE_ROOT(VALUE^2) It's simply the definition of the notation and what it means. People would rather write 16^[-5/7] than have to write: SEVENTH_ROOT([1/16][1/16][1/16][1/16][1/16]) James___ wrote:... but as shown in the images, using an inverse function can change a number without it being the result of a function (multiplication or division). So now that you understand the notation, can you find the error in the images? Remember, whether it's Global Warming, ATE, Climate Change, or any other type of gibber-babble, anything can be dutifully supported with just the right application of bogus math. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist

18-10-2021 18:33
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:To give you guys an idea, the inverse power rule is wrong. I didn't know there was a "rule" by that name. James___ wrote: 1/4 to the negative 1st power is not 4. Yes it is. It's not so much a rule as it is a definition (of notation). Writing [1/4]^-1 is just another way of writing 1/[1/4] ... which equals 4 because there are four one-fourths in the value "1". James___ wrote:With the inverse power, they say 4 written as a fraction is 4/1 which it is. It's not a fraction. It's a ratio. A fraction is a value between 0 and 1. James___ wrote:When it is 4/1^1 (to the negative first power), 1/4 is the opposite or inverse of 4. "1/4" is the multiplicative inverse of "4" and vice versa. James___ wrote:4^2 (4 squared or 4 times 4) is 16. That is the result of a function ... It is the result of a mathematical operation. James___ wrote: 1/4^-1 becoming 4 is not the result of a function. 1/4^-1 does not become 4. 1/4^-1 is, by definition, another way of writing "4." It's all in the definition of that little exponent notation. James___ wrote: If change was the result of function then 1/4^-1 would be 1/4 divided by 1/4 = 1. Not quite. Your base is always the number "1". You then multiply or divide by the specified value as indicated by the exponent. For example: VALUE^2 = 1 * VALUE^2 = 1 * VALUE * VALUE [i.e. you multiply by VALUE twice] VALUE^0 = 1 * VALUE^0 = 1 [and you multiply by VALUE zero times] VALUE^5 / VALUE^5 = VALUE^(5-5) = VALUE^0 = 1 VALUE^-3 = 1 / VALUE^3 = 1 / [VALUE * VALUE * VALUE] VALUE^[2/3] = 1 * VALUE^[2/3] = CUBE_ROOT(VALUE^2) It's simply the definition of the notation and what it means. People would rather write 16^[-5/7] than have to write: SEVENTH_ROOT([1/16][1/16][1/16][1/16][1/16]) James___ wrote:... but as shown in the images, using an inverse function can change a number without it being the result of a function (multiplication or division). So now that you understand the notation, can you find the error in the images? Remember, whether it's Global Warming, ATE, Climate Change, or any other type of gibber-babble, anything can be dutifully supported with just the right application of bogus math. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff. . Think James already knows that math can be used to clarify or confuse. Since there is no reason to pull out the math to clarify anything, then it's to intentionally confuse. A deception, which forces people that don't understand his babbling, to trust that he knows what he is trying to sell. He wants that false sense of credibility, much like those he idolizes. Not realizing that there are a lot of Phd's out there, who are clueless morons. Just because you can memorize a textbook or two, doesn't mean you comprehend, or can use the content. I did a lot of that, for subjects that held little interest, things of little practical use. I just needed the passing grade. While in college, I had the privilege of meeting quite a few clueless morons, who just needed a piece of paper to hang on the wall.
18-10-2021 19:02
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: Think James already knows that math can be used to clarify or confuse. Since there is no reason to pull out the math to clarify anything, then it's to intentionally confuse. A deception, which forces people that don't understand his babbling, to trust that he knows what he is trying to sell. He wants that false sense of credibility, much like those he idolizes. Not realizing that there are a lot of Phd's out there, who are clueless morons. Just because you can memorize a textbook or two, doesn't mean you comprehend, or can use the content. I did a lot of that, for subjects that held little interest, things of little practical use. I just needed the passing grade. While in college, I had the privilege of meeting quite a few clueless morons, who just needed a piece of paper to hang on the wall. You shouldn't talk about yourself that way Harvey. I'll give you an obvious example, okay? If we multiply 1 by -1 we get 1 * -1 = -1, right? And now if we count on a number line starting at one and count to -1 the number is 2. And if we multiply 3 * -1 = -3, the number is 6. In school they said to just accept it. Math isn't supposed to be that way. p.s., this is where with my service connected hearing loss I am supposed to go along to get along. That really doesn't work for me. Attached image: Edited on 18-10-2021 19:30
18-10-2021 21:19
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: Think James already knows that math can be used to clarify or confuse. Since there is no reason to pull out the math to clarify anything, then it's to intentionally confuse. A deception, which forces people that don't understand his babbling, to trust that he knows what he is trying to sell. He wants that false sense of credibility, much like those he idolizes. Not realizing that there are a lot of Phd's out there, who are clueless morons. Just because you can memorize a textbook or two, doesn't mean you comprehend, or can use the content. I did a lot of that, for subjects that held little interest, things of little practical use. I just needed the passing grade. While in college, I had the privilege of meeting quite a few clueless morons, who just needed a piece of paper to hang on the wall. You shouldn't talk about yourself that way Harvey. I'll give you an obvious example, okay? If we multiply 1 by -1 we get 1 * -1 = -1, right? And now if we count on a number line starting at one and count to -1 the number is 2. And if we multiply 3 * -1 = -3, the number is 6. In school they said to just accept it. Math isn't supposed to be that way. p.s., this is where with my service connected hearing loss I am supposed to go along to get along. That really doesn't work for me. You don't get to count the origin, as it has no value... You hold out your hand to get paid $5. You expect 5 -$1 bills, not 4... Think your hearing, wasn't the only disability you suffered. Though the others may have been pre-existing. Wasn't hearing protection required equipment for your work?
18-10-2021 23:24
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: Think James already knows that math can be used to clarify or confuse. Since there is no reason to pull out the math to clarify anything, then it's to intentionally confuse. A deception, which forces people that don't understand his babbling, to trust that he knows what he is trying to sell. He wants that false sense of credibility, much like those he idolizes. Not realizing that there are a lot of Phd's out there, who are clueless morons. Just because you can memorize a textbook or two, doesn't mean you comprehend, or can use the content. I did a lot of that, for subjects that held little interest, things of little practical use. I just needed the passing grade. While in college, I had the privilege of meeting quite a few clueless morons, who just needed a piece of paper to hang on the wall. You shouldn't talk about yourself that way Harvey. I'll give you an obvious example, okay? If we multiply 1 by -1 we get 1 * -1 = -1, right? And now if we count on a number line starting at one and count to -1 the number is 2. And if we multiply 3 * -1 = -3, the number is 6. In school they said to just accept it. Math isn't supposed to be that way. p.s., this is where with my service connected hearing loss I am supposed to go along to get along. That really doesn't work for me. You don't get to count the origin, as it has no value... You hold out your hand to get paid $5. You expect 5 -$1 bills, not 4... Think your hearing, wasn't the only disability you suffered. Though the others may have been pre-existing. Wasn't hearing protection required equipment for your work? I expect a $5 bill. You're life must be pretty bad Harvey. I feel sorry for you.
18-10-2021 23:41
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Nope. The wire does not retain magnetism. James___ wrote: Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. Nope. Phase has nothing to do with it. AC in wire does not have a lasting magnetic field. The field reverses just as the AC does. James___ wrote: With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. There is no phase in DC. James___ wrote: Mutual phase repels itself Mutual phase??? WTF is that??? James___ wrote: which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. It doesn't. James___ wrote: p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. Not Faraday's law. James___ wrote: Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? What charge? James___ wrote: It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. Alternators produce DC. They both have multiple windings. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-10-2021 23:43
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: With the armature of a D.C. generator, it's not a solid set of windings like its field coils. This is possibly what generates to homogeneous of a current. Neither is a solid set of windings. They are, however, electrically tied together in various ways, depending on the type of motor or generator. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-10-2021 23:47
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. Mutual phase repels itself which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. The magnet field is weak, and not worth worrying about. I do have a gadget that will detect current, without touching any wires. Got to be close though, inch or less maybe. Only works with A.C. though. Pretty handy, not having to use a meter to check an outlet or light socket. You are referring to a 'touchless' probe. These handy devices are great for electricians. I set mine to be very insensitive in most cases, since I am looking for one live wire in a bundle a lot of times. These are essentially a tiny winding in there that acts like a weak low voltage secondary transformer,which is sensed by the circuitry in the probe to light an LED. They only work with AC circuits. Unfortunately, they are not good enough to find broken points along an LED Christmas light string. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-10-2021 23:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: To IBdaMann: QED Which argument was proven? That you guys can't understand how 3 different waves of energy can pull at each other which significantly decreases entropy? To wit, wave energy exists because even when E = hv is stated, any frequency or wavelength of electromagnetic radiation has its own gravity. Why over distance the amplitude of the signal decreases according to the inverse square law. Yet the A.C. current doesn't suffer entropy according to the inverse square law because of its own electromagnetic attraction to other sine waves. So which argument was proven? I'm asking for a friend. Isn't each phase traveling through a separate wire? Still not sure what you are trying to figure out. Each phase is a separate conductor. They don't interact. Corn-Whiskey confusion? And now I know what I'm missing, the whiskey. It's the field that is being discussed. In a sense the transmission lines are magnetized because of the polarity of the currents running through them. Basically they are attracted to each other because they are out of phase. It's like the north and south poles on a magnetic being attracted to the other. With D.C. current, all lines are in phase with one another. Mutual phase repels itself which is why D.C. current basically suffers catastrophic failure. p.s., with Faraday's Law, the charge is developed moving towards the field coil. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html Does the charge reverse polarity when moving away from the field coil? It seems that with a D.C. generator that there are no separate coils as with the A.C. alternator. The magnet field is weak, and not worth worrying about. I do have a gadget that will detect current, without touching any wires. Got to be close though, inch or less maybe. Only works with A.C. though. Pretty handy, not having to use a meter to check an outlet or light socket. You are aware that trains travel at over 200 mph because of magnetic fields? So? Most trains travel around 60mph and much slower through towns or sections with curves. James___ wrote: 2 minutes to 200 mph and 268 mph once moving. That would destroy the train. James___ wrote: We discussed this in the thread about quantum computers because they operate at near absolute temperatures. Did you miss that thread? All temperatures are absolute temperatures. James___ wrote: It could be said the difference between D.C. and A.C. current is what led to other uses of electrical currents and the magnetic fields they generate. They both generate magnetic fields. James___ wrote: A mag-Lev train operates on the principle of opposing electrical currents. Instead of attraction as with the A.C. current, the fields are synchronous to have the same and not an opposing polarity. Maglev trains use AC to both support and drive the train forward. James___ wrote: A D.C. current simply isn't polarized. Yes it is. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-10-2021 23:55
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	James___ wrote: With the inverse power, they say 4 written as a fraction is 4/1 which it is. When it is 4/1^1 (to the negative first power), 1/4 is the opposite or inverse of 4. To consider 1/4^-1 was inverted to 4. With the images, the problem that was written is off to the right. https://photos.app.goo.gl/WQDhZ1uzKtNYvb4P7 But with https://photos.app.goo.gl/pvr3kfsjbeMc1mwS8 4^2 (4 squared or 4 times 4) is 16. That is the result of a function which in this instance was multiplication. 1/4^-1 becoming 4 is not the result of a function. Does this matter? Not really because people are taught it's the right way and that's about all that matters. If change was the result of function then 1/4^-1 would be 1/4 divided by 1/4 = 1. Division is the inverse of multiplication but as shown in the images, using an inverse function can change a number without it being the result of a function (multiplication or division). p.s., both expressions using an exponent has the same result when a fraction is being considered. Random phrases. No apparent coherency. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
19-10-2021 00:10
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: With the inverse power, they say 4 written as a fraction is 4/1 which it is. When it is 4/1^1 (to the negative first power), 1/4 is the opposite or inverse of 4. To consider 1/4^-1 was inverted to 4. With the images, the problem that was written is off to the right. https://photos.app.goo.gl/WQDhZ1uzKtNYvb4P7 But with https://photos.app.goo.gl/pvr3kfsjbeMc1mwS8 4^2 (4 squared or 4 times 4) is 16. That is the result of a function which in this instance was multiplication. 1/4^-1 becoming 4 is not the result of a function. Does this matter? Not really because people are taught it's the right way and that's about all that matters. If change was the result of function then 1/4^-1 would be 1/4 divided by 1/4 = 1. Division is the inverse of multiplication but as shown in the images, using an inverse function can change a number without it being the result of a function (multiplication or division). p.s., both expressions using an exponent has the same result when a fraction is being considered. Random phrases. No apparent coherency. Congratulations Sir!! You are the first person to fail a Rorschach test.

Page 1 of 2

Join the debate A.C. Generator:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Solar Power Generator Observations	43	22-11-2017 21:53