John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#39,901
gootee said:
Well there's at least one person on diyaudio who would give Heaviside a rather "warm" reception. During an antenna discussion he blasted Heaviside, claiming that when he converted Maxwell's many quaternion equations into the four "Maxwell's Equations" that we all know and love, he left out a bunch of vector cross-product terms, possibly because he felt that they were insignificant. The guy claimed that they were not always insignificant and therefore, much of what has been done is not quite correct, and some is quite incorrect.

This intrigued me enough that I purchased books containing all of Maxwell's original manuscripts. But I haven't yet taken the time to check his story. He did seem to have a very high level of electromagnetics knowledge.
Click to expand...
Then I guess A. Einstein called it well " Make it as simple as possible but no simpler." that cover the problem Me thinks. 😎
 
#39,902
Heaviside should fit right in here: Oliver Heaviside: A first-rate oddity

Special Relativity, Minkowski Space-Time is a more elegant - and necessary system for the complete theory of EM

the Gibbs/Heaviside Vector Algebra success with Maxwell's equations enabled great progress in applying EM technologically but is argued by some to be outdated - we should teach/learn Clifford Algebra informed Vector Algebra that does permit the full 4-D non-Euclidean Special Relativity Space Time math
Gibbs/Heaviside Vector Cross-Product is "stuck" in 3-D Euclidean space - can't be used in higher dimensions, mixed metrics

http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/~clifford/

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Geometric-Algebra-Electromagnetic-Theory/dp/0470941634
 
Last edited:
#39,905
I used Oliver Heaviside's Operational Calculus to solve a transient problem for my PhD research. EE's told me I should have used a multivariable Laplace Transform instead, but I found Heaviside's method simpler to use.

Various people have been trying to claim secret physics is hidden in Maxwell's original theory for many years, and often seeking to link this with gravity. They are generally not take seriously by physicists.

It could be argued that 3-D vector calculus is the wrong maths to use: 4-D tensor calculus is a better fit but not many EEs study tensors and special relativity so they are forced to continue to treat electric and magnetic fields as separate (but coupled) entities. The truth appears to be that the real physical entity is the 4-D potential field (i.e. scalar and vector potential combined into a Lorentz invariant 4-vector), and electric and magnetic fields are merely convenient calculation tools for finding forces on particles and convenient visualisation tools. However, I am very rusty on all this as it is about 35 years since I was a theoretical physics postgrad. A friend of mine spent part of his PhD looking at using quarternions for general relativity.

As far as I am aware, robotic arm movements is about the only current application for quarternions. Everywhere else there are other better ways to do the required maths.
 
#39,906
jcx said:
Heaviside should fit right in here: Oliver Heaviside: A first-rate oddity
Click to expand...

Thank you jcx for that very good link.
Just a few notes for to connect the main points of the article with his EM Theory

Volume 1 http://archive.org/download/electromagnetict01heavrich/electromagnetict01heavrich.pdf
Chapter II is Heaviside’s treat of Maxwell EM formulae (forces and fluxes instead of potential functions.
Chapter III is vector algebra and analysis
Chapter IV is the place where his theory on the distortionless circuit is developed.

Volume 3 http://archive.org/download/electromagnetict03heavuoft/electromagnetict03heavuoft.pdf
from the onset, he deals (hailing Lorentz) with EM waves velocity (υ) and the velocity of a body (u), letting theory allowing for unlimited body speeds just to prove that this is unattainable, as it would invalidate the main EM law: μcυ^2 =1, c being the permitivity and μ the inductivity of aether (this still holds for our modern vacuum).

Gibbs/Heaviside Vector Cross-Product is "stuck" in 3-D Euclidean space - can't be used in higher dimensions, mixed metrics
Click to expand...

:worried:I will need a few more lives (*) to read his work and understand all he wrote about, before reaching the limits of that theory.

George

(*) :xfingers: I’ll come back as a human and not as an insect.
 

Attachments

  • Heaviside-geometry.JPG
    Heaviside-geometry.JPG
    106.5 KB · Views: 232
Last edited:
#39,907
DF96 said:
As far as I am aware, robotic arm movements is about the only current application for quarternions. Everywhere else there are other better ways to do the required maths.
Click to expand...

There's quite a few apps that use it, according to google..

For my 11 axis machine, I just use matrix algebra for the first 8 axis... Heck of a lot easier re-mapping through the coordinate systems than trying to develop the equations on a per axis basis. Even then, it still gets confusing..

jn
 
#39,908
RNMarsh said:
Seems that one needs to see things differently than us linear thinkers --- These notables all had a "learning disorder" called Dyslexia:

Al. Einstein
I. Newton
N.tesla
B.Franklin
Galileo
H.Ford
W. Von Braun
Pablo Picasso
Steven Spielberg
A.G. Bell
T.Edison
J.maxwell
M.faraday
H.C.Andersen
and a host of celebs, too.

Thinking outside the box comes naturally for some.

May you have a Learning Disorder.

-RNM
Click to expand...

OTOH, I know lots of dyslexis who are total losers 😉

jan
 
#39,917
DF96 said:
The truth appears to be that the real physical entity is the 4-D potential field (i.e. scalar and vector potential combined into a Lorentz invariant 4-vector), and electric and magnetic fields are merely convenient calculation tools for finding forces on particles and convenient visualisation tools..
Click to expand...

I have similar thoughts about the use of FFT...

Thx-RNMarsh
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom