Open Circuit Inductor

Status
Not open for further replies.

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
 

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?
 

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


I to can use the internet
https://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contradiction
 
Styx said:
...IF the inductor is in a perfect vacuum...the liberated copper atoms/electrons would facilitate an arch...

Styx said:
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...
 

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

Her eis the full quote!

styx said:
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
 
Styx said:
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.
 

Following a thread != good spelling
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…