Open Circuit Inductor

[Styx]

so what if their isn't
plus anyway I have already shown that in a perfect vacuum #2 occurs :roll:

Oh ya, now I remember who you are.... You didnt originally "show" anything, you asked. My point was that there IS no perfect vacuum, so #2 HAS to happen. In addition to the incorrect use of the possessive, you're being contradictory.

Explain?
The 6th post in this thread I posted abt "work function" which will liberate electrons an a perfect vacuum in the presence of a latge enough electric-field thus allowing a path for the current in an inductor to flow

Please explain how I was being contradictory

 

[Optikon]

so what if their isn't
plus anyway I have already shown that in a perfect vacuum #2 occurs :roll:

Oh ya, now I remember who you are.... You didnt originally "show" anything, you asked. My point was that there IS no perfect vacuum, so #2 HAS to happen. In addition to the incorrect use of the possessive, you're being contradictory.

Hmmm.. In deep outer space there is darn close to a perfect vacuum. The only "things" that make it not "perfect" are the fact that virtual particles are created & anhilated (SP?) at such brief intervals it is difficult to comprehend. So, what if this is the vacuum under discussion? How do you think these come into play with your theory?

 

[G8RPI]

Assumption:
Current is flowing in an isolated coil in space. The connection at both ends is suddenly removed so the coil become truely isolated.

the current flow will charge up the self capacitance of the coil.

OK. There is some form of energy stored. Then what next?

After some hours later, i.e. steady state, what happens?

This "special capacitor" is unlike a normal capacitor consists of two plates with opposite charges. The capacitance is distributed through out the coil since one turn lies next to those beside it and above the ones under it, etc. The electric field is due to the potential difference across the coil due to its resistance and the current flowing. The "capacitor" now changed into a single electrode fromed by the coil made up of metal. No potential difference can exists on different part of a metal object because it is now isolated in space, with no current flowing. There is a current flowing, ie. the current that was flowing at the instant the circuit was opened. And there is a potential difference across the coil since it has resistance. So the stored energy immediately during the disconnection may well have become a static charge on the isolated coil or have gone all together and lost as heat in oscillation. As I wrote previously, it will oscillate and the energy will be dissipated as heat due to the resistance of the coil.

Would there be a net charge on the coil? No. When an LC circuit oscillates, the energy is transferred from the magnetic field to the electric field and vice versa. So eventually, all the energy will be dissipated. There cannot be a static charge left since the coil is a conductor. If so, does the polarity of this charge related to the direction of the original current direction?

The situation is difficult to visualise since the capacitance is distributed. I don't know how it would be analysed mathematically. I assume you would have to treat the coil like a transmission line.

There is one other mode of energy "conversion" other than losses in imperfect components, This is radiation, As the circuit osillates, RF energy will be radiated. A perfect LC circut with no losses or radiation would just oscillate for ever with the energy being transferred back and forth between magnetic (coil) and electrostatic (capacitor) storage. This is perpetual motion and not possible in practice!

Robert G8RPI.

 

[hyedenny]

Please explain how I was being contradictory

Apart from the fact that the notion of a perfect vacuum is valid for theoretical purposes only, you can't have both a "perfect vacuum," and atoms floating round waiting to be ionized. The presence of atoms renders your vacuum "unperfect."

From Wikipedia: "A perfect vacuum, known as "free space", with a gaseous pressure of absolute zero is a philosophical concept with no physical reality."

PS - Wikipedia also has a great explanation on the usage of question marks and exclamation points.

 

[hyedenny]

Please exuse me for not being more clear. When I mentioned your "original" post, was referring to the 1st one - not the 6th one!

 

[Styx]

Apart from the fact that the notion of a perfect vacuum is valid for theoretical purposes only, you can't have both a "perfect vacuum," and atoms floating round waiting to be ionized. The presence of atoms renders your vacuum "unperfect."

Again I ask where is my contradition?
I never raised the notion of "atoms floating round" while in a "vacuum" you did, so are you in the habbit of adding stuff to a thread in the name of someone else to try to make a point

From Wikipedia: "A perfect vacuum, known as "free space", with a gaseous pressure of absolute zero is a philosophical concept with no physical reality."

PS - Wikipedia also has a great explanation on the usage of question marks and exclamation points.

I to can use the internet
https://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contradiction

contradiction

n 1: opposition between two conflicting forces or ideas 2: (logic) a statement that is necessarily false; "the statement `he is brave and he is not brave' is a contradiction" [syn: contradiction in terms] 3: the speech act of contradicting someone; "he spoke as if he thought his claims were immune to contradiction"

 

[hyedenny]

...IF the inductor is in a perfect vacuum...the liberated copper atoms/electrons would facilitate an arch...

so what if their isn't [such a thing as a perfect vacuum]
plus anyway I have already shown that in a perfect vacuum #2 [ionization of copper atoms] occurs

There are your two conflicting ideas, TWICE! - there's your mention of copper atoms/electrons floating around - there's your mention of a necessarily false "perfect" vacuum.

I didn't "(add) any stuff," nor did I misquote you, if that's what you're trying to say.

Here it is again: You can't at the same time have BOTH a perfect vacuum AND atoms to ionize to facilitate an arch (sic). In fact, you can't even have a perfect vacuum, no matter how much Metamucil you ingest.

I can continue trying in different ways to show you how those statements are contradictory, but I think it's a waste of my time. If it makes you happy: I'm wrong - it IS possible to have a perfect vacuum AND have atoms of copper to ionize therein.

You may know how to use the internet, and you may be privy to some heretofore undiscovered fantasies of physics, but you still don't know the difference between an arch and an arc; to and too; their and there; how to spell habit, etc, etc, etc...

 

[Styx]

There are your two conflicting ideas, TWICE! - there's your mention of copper atoms/electrons floating around - there's your mention of a necessarily false "perfect" vacuum.

I didn't "(add) any stuff," nor did I misquote you, if that's what you're trying to say.

Here it is again: You can't at the same time have BOTH a perfect vacuum AND atoms to ionize to facilitate an arch (sic). In fact, you can't even have a perfect vacuum, no matter how much Metamucil you ingest.

I can continue trying in different ways to show you how those statements are contradictory, but I think it's a waste of my time. If it makes you happy: I'm wrong - it IS possible to have a perfect vacuum AND have atoms of copper to ionize therein.

You may know how to use the internet, and you may be privy to some heretofore undiscovered fantasies of physics, but you still don't know the difference between an arch and an arc; to and too; their and there; how to spell habit, etc, etc, etc...

You really DO NOT know how to follow a thread do you !!!!

Her eis the full quote!

the copper at the terminal ends would start to vapourise under the extreamly high electro-field (not infinite) and the liberated copper atoms/electrons would facilitate an arch.

I never said in a perfect vacuum atoms exist, I said that IF an inductor was in a perfect vacuum and THEN you open-cct it, the induced high electric field would liberate electrons to facilitate the arc. Did I say that at that point it was still a perfect vacuum NO,

you really have no idea do you

 

[hyedenny]

You really DO NOT know how to follow a thread do you !!!!

Now YOU'RE trying to accuse ME of not having a good command of the English language?
HA HA! That's a good one.

Oh ya, I forgot "extreamely," thanks for pointing that out. "Crucual" was a good one too. Are you a masochist, or just a frustrated grade-school dropout?

I'm done with your BS. Enjoy your vacuum.

 

[Styx]

Now YOU'RE trying to accuse ME of not having a good command of the English language?
HA HA! That's a good one.

Oh ya, I forgot "extreamely," thanks for pointing that out. "Crucual" was a good one too. Are you a masochist, or just a frustrated grade-school dropout?

I'm done with your BS. Enjoy your vacuum.

Following a thread != good spelling