Looking for a sheet that resists

[crashsite]

A Tutorial on Tutorials?

To me, the way you use the word substance is just another instance of how you are making unsubstantiated generalizations. At least, this is my belief at this time. I an open to suggestions about how I can learn better and more.....

This might be a good opportunity for me to make a mini-tirade of my own (proving once again that the only thing I am unable to resist is, temptation).

When people learn electricity and electronics in a classical setting, there is an order to the learning. The expectation is that the students are going to learn about circuit theory and practice and that's how the process starts. And, it's a very mathematical process; series and parallel resistor calculations and reactances (capacitors and inductors) in a DC environment and tube and transistor calculations. Then it moves on to AC practice and the math tends more to trigonometry (phase angle and such). As the courses progress, they become more specialized (RF, microwave, electro-optics, power distribution, etc.) and even those branch out into more specialized fields (radio astronomy, medical, radar/sonar, weapons systems, etc. etc.) and then to even more specialized areas and a lot more etc.'s.

What's not covered very well is the physics behind the circuits. The expectation there is that the physics will be learned in physics classes and , the student will be able to fuse the circuits and physics together as needed. It doesn't always work but, that's a whole 'nother topic.

Because of the way electricity and electronics are learned, there is an expectation that someone who is truly interested and committed to learning electronics will, either by attending classes or by studying basic electrical materials on their own, will come away with at least the basics.

Unfortuanately, a lot (dare I even say most) people who try to "wing it", end up floundering. They always seem to be trying to make things fit some imagined model of the way they think electricity and electronics work...or should work. To be honest, there's plenty of floundering even among people who have taken electronics classes (including myself).

But, when you post in these forums and you don't even know what questions to ask or the terminology to use or how to understand the answers even when they really are at an extremely basic level, it really does no one any good. It creates a meaningless jumble of half-assed, indecipherable data.

So, the first recommendation is to take the advice to learn some basics. Take a class, look for interenet tutorials, read a book, find or make a knowledgable friend. As you show that you are taking some responsibility to align your knowledge base with those who seem to have some idea of how things work, your input will be accepted a lot more graciously.

They say there's no such thing as a dumb question but, there's a difference between asking a "dumb question", getting an answer and then continuing to ask the same question over and over again because you just don't make an effort to try to understand the answers that are given....that's dumb.

Thre's a lot more to say on the subject and there are a LOT of snippets and generalized statements and opinions but, it sort of sums it up. But, it's getting tediously long and even a dumb bunny such as myself knows when to cut i

 

[jasonbe]

This might be a good opportunity for me to make a mini-tirade of my own (proving once again that the only thing I am unable to resist is, temptation).

When people learn electricity and electronics in a classical setting, there is an order to the learning. The expectation is that the students are going to learn about circuit theory and practice and that's how the process starts. And, it's a very mathematical process; series and parallel resistor calculations and reactances (capacitors and inductors) in a DC environment and tube and transistor calculations. Then it moves on to AC practice and the math tends more to trigonometry (phase angle and such). As the courses progress, they become more specialized (RF, microwave, electro-optics, power distribution, etc.) and even those branch out into more specialized fields (radio astronomy, medical, radar/sonar, weapons systems, etc. etc.) and then to even more specialized areas and a lot more etc.'s.

What's not covered very well is the physics behind the circuits. The expectation there is that the physics will be learned in physics classes and , the student will be able to fuse the circuits and physics together as needed. It doesn't always work but, that's a whole 'nother topic.

Because of the way electricity and electronics are learned, there is an expectation that someone who is truly interested and committed to learning electronics will, either by attending classes or by studying basic electrical materials on their own, will come away with at least the basics.

Unfortuanately, a lot (dare I even say most) people who try to "wing it", end up floundering. They always seem to be trying to make things fit some imagined model of the way they think electricity and electronics work...or should work. To be honest, there's plenty of floundering even among people who have taken electronics classes (including myself).

But, when you post in these forums and you don't even know what questions to ask or the terminology to use or how to understand the answers even when they really are at an extremely basic level, it really does no one any good. It creates a meaningless jumble of half-assed, indecipherable data.

So, the first recommendation is to take the advice to learn some basics. Take a class, look for interenet tutorials, read a book, find or make a knowledgable friend. As you show that you are taking some responsibility to align your knowledge base with those who seem to have some idea of how things work, your input will be accepted a lot more graciously.

They say there's no such thing as a dumb question but, there's a difference between asking a "dumb question", getting an answer and then continuing to ask the same question over and over again because you just don't make an effort to try to understand the answers that are given....that's dumb.

Thre's a lot more to say on the subject and there are a LOT of snippets and generalized statements and opinions but, it sort of sums it up. But, it's getting tediously long and even a dumb bunny such as myself knows when to cut i

Thank you for the outline. Still, what would have been easier - writing that or listing the factors that make AC representable by a sine wave?

 

[crashsite]

Swan Song

The fact that you believe that I am lying would seem to suggest to me that you have a clue of what the lie is. Perhaps this is the truth that you mention. If this is the case, then you may be being rhetorical - and want me to guess about what you believe. From my experience, I don't expect you to be direct immediately - or at all. But even if you are being rhetorical I would like to call your attention to the word lie - that I don't think that you are using the word appropriately.

Even though my little tirade did quote you, it wasn't really directed at you. It was more of a generalization. I've looked at more than just the "sruface" of your posts in this thread and I'm pretty confident of my assertions.

But, you know that and, of course, you're just as happy with this "new" direction your game is going...as long as it's going...

But, it wearies me. So, good luck.

 

[crashsite]

A Really Difficult Task

Thank you for the outline. Still, what would have been easier - writing that or listing the factors that make AC representable by a sine wave?

This web page took about 10 or 15 minutes to find by Googling, "ac generator" + animation.

**broken link removed**

Scroll down to the animation. Geez, do you even try?

 

[dknguyen]

AC is generated by a rotation motion to which it is directly proportional to. Rotation = sinusoid. If you're going to ask why can circular motion can be represented as a sinusoid, you need to stop trolling and take a math class (among the many other things you need to study, not about- that's study, not ask).

 

[jasonbe]

Can the resistance produced by a sheet of uniform composition accurately be measured between two electrical contacts linearly? Could someone describe why or why not in a sheet - in addition to any formulas that you may or may not be able to provide?

If a charge gradient is or could be instantaneously reversed in a wire, how long does it take for the electron flow to reverse direction – and how much does this time vary as a function of the maximum original charge? What combinations of minimal amplitude and minimal frequency can be accurately controlled and measured in AC in normal wires – or does the same model tend to apply to all amplitudes, frequencies, and wires?

Has anyone heard of a sheet that efficiently converts electricity into the movement of molecules around each other without producing a lot of heat?

 

[Triode]

Has anyone heard of a sheet that efficiently converts electricity into the movement of molecules around each other without producing a lot of heat?

wow, now that would be some high tech stuff. I mean a motor technically makes molecules move, but if you mean each molecule, that would be one step above directly producing heat, in fact such a material would be an excellent heating element. But then if its a sheet and all its molecules move around each other, its turned into a liquid, a molten hot one at that.

 

[dknguyen]

Actually, that's nanotechnology...you know...the kind of thing the T-1000 is made of.

 

[jasonbe]

wow, now that would be some high tech stuff. I mean a motor technically makes molecules move, but if you mean each molecule, that would be one step above directly producing heat, in fact such a material would be an excellent heating element. But then if its a sheet and all its molecules move around each other, its turned into a liquid, a molten hot one at that.

I imagine that there might have to be a molecular pivot between two parts of a larger molecule or association of molecules. Perhaps electrons transported around or through one or both of these two parts might repel neighboring parts causing these two parts to move in relation to each other. As far as I know, the electricity would have to be converted into either motion of these two parts, heat, light, or something else - preferably motion.

 

[jasonbe]

How fine is the line between nanotechnology and something that I can measure changes in electricity in without advanced equipment?

 

[dknguyen]

I imagine that there might have to be a molecular pivot between two parts of a larger molecule or association of molecules. Perhaps electrons transported around or through one or both of these two parts might repel neighboring parts causing these two parts to move in relation to each other. As far as I know, the electricity would have to be converted into either motion of these two parts, heat, light, or something else - preferably motion.

You don't know enough to visualize how objects that small interact with each other. As a result your visualization is full of misconceptions. The worst part is we've already been through them but you have been unwilling to fix them. Attempting to visualize them will only make more misconceptions that you are not willing to fix.

How fine is the line between nanotechnology and something that I can measure changes in electricity in without advanced equipment?

At least try to word your question so that it seems like you gave your question a moment's though before typing it out. When you type out the first thing that pops into your head, it shows. It also shows when you keep you keep asking new questions but don't listen to what anyone is saying.

 

[crashsite]

Keeping Score

At least try to word your question so that it seems like you gave your question a moment's though before typing it out. When you type out the first thing that pops into your head, it shows. It also shows when you keep you keep asking new questions but don't listen to what anyone is saying.

Still thinking it's not a game for him, are ya? Look at the wording and content of his posts in the context of someone who is deliberately trying to provide the "right" words and spin to elicit a response...any response.

But, I do think this thread is a good case study.

 

[killivolt]

I'll pass on the peanuts. Thanks.

Still thinking it's not a game for him, are ya? Look at the wording and content of his posts in the context of someone who is deliberately trying to provide the "right" words and spin to elicit a response...any response.

But, I do think this thread is a good case study.

It's a case alright. But, a study.............................................no.

Teased to deviation.

Mind if I put my line into the water.

Trolling trolling trolling.

kv

 

[Triode]

The only alternative to trolling would be that hes an educated insane person, like the time cube guy.

 

[crashsite]

Semantics

The only alternative to trolling would be that hes an educated insane person, like the time cube guy.

Hmmmm...I'm not so sure that, "troll" may not be such an inappropriate adjective....noun, even.

 

[jasonbe]

You don't know enough to visualize how objects that small interact with each other. As a result your visualization is full of misconceptions. The worst part is we've already been through them but you have been unwilling to fix them. Attempting to visualize them will only make more misconceptions that you are not willing to fix.

What is so difficult to visualize? There's a bunch of parts making up a compound. One of these parts is a movable connection, another is a brace - whether that be a movable connection or not, another is region having an adjustable electron density that may attract or repel neighboring parts, another is an electronic transport mechanism connected to the region having a electron density, another is a place or places where electrons can be introduced or leave - and the product is something that involves accelerating parts.

 

[jasonbe]

At least try to word your question so that it seems like you gave your question a moment's though before typing it out. When you type out the first thing that pops into your head, it shows. It also shows when you keep you keep asking new questions but don't listen to what anyone is saying.

All right. I may have been making some assumptions. I was wondering about ways to make electrons move in a regulated way. In order for the electrons to move in a regulated way, they may have to inhabit orbitals that are far from the conduction band - and only make it to the conduction band after a bunch of other electrons are introduced and repel them to that location. And I was wondering if it would be possible to keep on introducing electrons in this manner producing some molecules spaced such that moluces closer to a place where electrons were introduced are more electron dense than those further away where the electons are sparse and inhabit bands closer to the conduction band or conduction orbitals. I don't know if this has been done or is possible but it occurred to me. And it would be useful because such a regulated movement of electons might be able to be altered in such a way as to make them measurable according to the density of the electrons near selected molecules at different intervals.

 

[Triode]

What is so difficult to visualize?

Nothing, if you don't stick to the wrong ideas. These aren't like hinges and shafts, and they can't really be adjusted. Atoms, and thus, molecules, are all made from a few basic building blocks. electrons, protons and electrons are, except for extreemly rare cases, all the same, every electron has the same charge, the same mass as every other electron. The only things that can vary about any of these particles is their velocity and position. They aren't just very small objects. Once you get to the smallest part theres less variability, you are trying to apply properties that don't apply. Yes, there are different kinds of connections between molecules, and chemists do engineer substances that have coveilent bonds in one place and polar bonds in another to accomplish a certain task, thats what chemical engineering is. But even if you could do that, you couldent make a substance that would move internally on the molecular level but not heat up, because thats what heat IS. Its like saying you want to make something continualy change position along a path, but you dont want it to move.

 

[jasonbe]

Still thinking it's not a game for him, are ya? Look at the wording and content of his posts in the context of someone who is deliberately trying to provide the "right" words and spin to elicit a response...any response.

But, I do think this thread is a good case study.

Well, you made a comment so I'm going to respond. Actually, I'm just going to guess because you don't answer and questions. Are you claiming that I don't have a functional model of electric conduction?

 

[jasonbe]

It's a case alright. But, a study.............................................no.

Teased to deviation.

Mind if I put my line into the water.

Trolling trolling trolling.

kv

You may have developed a consensus between one or more people but your reasoning does not seem to me to be sufficiently explained.