Re: Its not the wave OR the water
That's a relief. I figured he might do something really sadistic, like bring out... THE COMFY CHAIR! AAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
Hehehe. Nice lyrics. Perhaps on my next pilgrimage to Tower I'll check it out and see if the music's just as good.
se
Fred Dieckmann said:
That's a relief. I figured he might do something really sadistic, like bring out... THE COMFY CHAIR! AAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
Hehehe. Nice lyrics. Perhaps on my next pilgrimage to Tower I'll check it out and see if the music's just as good.
se
Jimmy Dale Gilmore
Lyrics by Butch Hancock. Mr. Gilmore is great but I love most of the Texas singers like Tish Hinahosa, Lyle Lovett, and Robert Earl Keen. A high subjective taste I will admit.
You want lyrics?!!
Dallas
Jimmie Dale Gilmore
Did you ever see Dallas from a DC-9 at night?
Well Dallas is a jewel, oh yeah, Dallas is a beautiful sight.
And Dallas is a jungle but Dallas gives a beautiful light.
Did you ever see Dallas from a DC-9 at night?
Well, Dallas is a woman who will walk on you when you're down.
But when you are up, she's the kind you want to take around.
But Dallas ain't a woman to help you get your feet on the ground.
Yes Dallas is a woman who will walk on you when you're down.
Well, I came into Dallas with the bright lights on my mind,
But I came into Dallas with a Dollar and a dime.
Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eye.
A steel and concrete soul with a warm hearted love disguise.
A rich man who tends to believe in his own lies.
Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes.
Lyrics by Butch Hancock. Mr. Gilmore is great but I love most of the Texas singers like Tish Hinahosa, Lyle Lovett, and Robert Earl Keen. A high subjective taste I will admit.
You want lyrics?!!
Dallas
Jimmie Dale Gilmore
Did you ever see Dallas from a DC-9 at night?
Well Dallas is a jewel, oh yeah, Dallas is a beautiful sight.
And Dallas is a jungle but Dallas gives a beautiful light.
Did you ever see Dallas from a DC-9 at night?
Well, Dallas is a woman who will walk on you when you're down.
But when you are up, she's the kind you want to take around.
But Dallas ain't a woman to help you get your feet on the ground.
Yes Dallas is a woman who will walk on you when you're down.
Well, I came into Dallas with the bright lights on my mind,
But I came into Dallas with a Dollar and a dime.
Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eye.
A steel and concrete soul with a warm hearted love disguise.
A rich man who tends to believe in his own lies.
Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes.
Steve Eddy said:mikek said:...an electromotive force...or potential difference established across a conductor of whatever provenance, will not 'set up' an 'electromagnetic wave'.....this can be found in any elementary physics text...etc...etc...which i reckon is where i am going to leave it.....
see definition of electromagnetic wave...and to use your beloved phrase, ' learn something'
Are you for real?
Yes, let's look at the definition of electromagnetic wave:
<i>A wave produced by the interaction of time-varying electric and magnetic fields.</i>
You can't establish a voltage across a conductor without producing time-varying electric and magnetic fields, unless the voltage across the conductor has ALWAYS existed and NEVER changes.
Going back to the previous example, before you flip the switch, the voltage across A+ and A- is zero. Which means that electric and magnetic fields are also zero. When you flip the switch, then the voltage goes from zero to something other than zero and the electric and magnetic fields in the wire also go from zero to something other than zero.
So now you have time-varying electric and magnetic fields which propagate down the line in the form of an electromagnetic wave.
If you're truly just being naive here, that's one thing. If you're being disingenuous and running around kicking people in the shins just to try and get a rise out of them, then I suggest you either stop or find some other board to post on.
se
AHA.......now i see precisely where you are going wrong.......you now suggest initial circuit transient set up electromagnetic waves, and finaly accept that the motion of electrons in a conductor is not described by a 'wave'...apology accepted.....
www.cs.mdx.ac.uk/ccm/ccm2012/Lecture7.pdf
propagation for poets
"AHA.......now i see precisely where you are going wrong.......you now suggest initial circuit transient set up electromagnetic waves, and finaly accept that the motion of electrons in a conductor is not described by a 'wave'...apology accepted....."
Steve, I think he is saying that as far as analogies go, you should discuss "not the wave, but just the water"..........
Mike,
But now we have gone from circuit analysis and simple transmission lines, to electromagnetic waves propagating in free space and some very simplified antenna theory. I am puzzled what this has to do with audio power amplifier design but I'll play. Also you failed to capitalize "I" again and misspelled "finally." I am going to start marking off for this unless English isn't your first language. I guess you weren't at the top of the class in English.
Let me save you the labor of escalating the levels of complexity for fun and go all the way to the most confusing level.
http://musr.physics.ubc.ca/~jess/hr/skept/Maxwell/Maxwell.html
I believe the short version of what you are trying to say is below:
"AHA.......now i see precisely where you are going wrong.......you now suggest initial circuit transient set up electromagnetic waves, and finaly accept that the motion of electrons in a conductor is not described by a 'wave'...apology accepted....."
Steve, I think he is saying that as far as analogies go, you should discuss "not the wave, but just the water"..........
Mike,
But now we have gone from circuit analysis and simple transmission lines, to electromagnetic waves propagating in free space and some very simplified antenna theory. I am puzzled what this has to do with audio power amplifier design but I'll play. Also you failed to capitalize "I" again and misspelled "finally." I am going to start marking off for this unless English isn't your first language. I guess you weren't at the top of the class in English.
Let me save you the labor of escalating the levels of complexity for fun and go all the way to the most confusing level.
http://musr.physics.ubc.ca/~jess/hr/skept/Maxwell/Maxwell.html
I believe the short version of what you are trying to say is below:
Attachments
Questions for mikek
Mikek - Just to see where you are really comming from, a question: Do you think that electrons from from your cartridge or dac all the way through the pre/power amps and to your speakers individually carrying a part of the signal, or do the electrons drift slowly in that general direction while the electromagnetic wave travels that way at about 80% of C?
Mikek - Just to see where you are really comming from, a question: Do you think that electrons from from your cartridge or dac all the way through the pre/power amps and to your speakers individually carrying a part of the signal, or do the electrons drift slowly in that general direction while the electromagnetic wave travels that way at about 80% of C?
Re: propagation for poets
What he's really saying is that he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about.
Ok, let's go back to water.
Take a tube of a given length with two flexible diaphragms at each end and fill the tube with water.
What mikek has been saying is that if you press the diaphragm at one end, the diaphragm at the other end will instantaneously move outward in response. And not instantaneously as in such a short period of time that it might as well be instantaneous, he means literally instantaneous as in absolutely zero time delay.
What he doesn't understand is that this is just plain not true.
The physical force (analogous to EMF in the electrical domain) applied at one end of the tube does not instantaneously appear at the other end. Instead that force is propagated down the length of the tube in the form of a pressure wave which propagates at a finite velocity.
And propagating at a finite velocity, over any non-zero length, will result in a delay before the diaphragm at the other end of the tube responds.
se
Fred Dieckmann said:
What he's really saying is that he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about.
Ok, let's go back to water.
Take a tube of a given length with two flexible diaphragms at each end and fill the tube with water.
What mikek has been saying is that if you press the diaphragm at one end, the diaphragm at the other end will instantaneously move outward in response. And not instantaneously as in such a short period of time that it might as well be instantaneous, he means literally instantaneous as in absolutely zero time delay.
What he doesn't understand is that this is just plain not true.
The physical force (analogous to EMF in the electrical domain) applied at one end of the tube does not instantaneously appear at the other end. Instead that force is propagated down the length of the tube in the form of a pressure wave which propagates at a finite velocity.
And propagating at a finite velocity, over any non-zero length, will result in a delay before the diaphragm at the other end of the tube responds.
se
mikek said:AHA.......now i see precisely where you are going wrong...
Actually, electrons are described by a wavefunction, but that's another matter.
The fact remains that nothing happens instantaneously across any distance because nothing moves with infinite velocity. Not electrons. Not forces (EMF or otherwise). Not electric fields. Not magnetic fields. Not electromagnetic waves. Not light. Not sound. Not anything.
se
SOUTH PARK.
Hi,
Can't you guys conclude?
Thank heaven I don't have to sit through meetings with you lot...
Thank God it's Friday too...or is it full moon at your end?
So far only two or three of you have got the NFB theory right, hardly two of them seem to know how to implement it correctly for audio use, while all the time all I see is bashing.
Even when given perfectly valid pointers you folk just can't let go and must make fools out of yourselves, right?
And no, stop looking at me...it's too damm easy.
Time to move on I'd say,
Hi,
Can't you guys conclude?
Thank heaven I don't have to sit through meetings with you lot...
Thank God it's Friday too...or is it full moon at your end?
So far only two or three of you have got the NFB theory right, hardly two of them seem to know how to implement it correctly for audio use, while all the time all I see is bashing.
Even when given perfectly valid pointers you folk just can't let go and must make fools out of yourselves, right?
And no, stop looking at me...it's too damm easy.
Time to move on I'd say,
SY said:
You know, I had a feeling that I'd get a reply like this but I decided to take my chances.
We're dealing with someone who can't even get a water analogy correct so I didn't want to confuse things even further with qualifications which had nothing to do with the topic at hand.
So for all intents and purposes germane to the subject at hand, it's true, and I assume you'd agree with that.
Have a great weekend!
se
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.