The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

[MileHigh]

Epwpix:

Okay, let's put Oliver Heaviside to the side for a minute and just discuss the electricity-water analogy.

You are still disagreeing with me.  If you are disagreeing with me then tell me why the analogy is wrong.  NO, you cannot point back to Oliver Heaviside or any other reference.  Do you understand me, I am asking you to tell me yourself why you disagree with what I say,

Can you tell me why the analogy is wrong in your own words?

Now, let's assume for the sake of argument that you can't tell me.  I don't want to prejudge you, it all depends on your response to my question.   However, if you can not actually tell me that the analogy is wrong, then what does that say?

What it says is that you can't disagree with a concept under the following conditions:  1)  You don't understand the concept yourself, and 2) The only thing that you know is that you have a reference that is in disagreement with the concept.  That is simply not a way to formulate an argument.

Please be honest and I will wait for your response.

MileHigh

[ramset]

Epwpix
your contributions have always inspired thought and as I see here perhaps provoke more thought than some are comfortable with...
and beg a return to familiar ground.


thx
Chet

[MileHigh]

Chet:

Take a pot-shot at me if you want.  That leads into a question for you:  Do you yourself understand the water-electricity analogy?  If you do, can you cite an example?

This reminds me of a time where I was making reference to the right-hand rule.  Somebody posts back with a link to some obscure process or application where there was a reference to a "left-hand rule."

So, what does that say?  You find a reference to a "left-hand rule" and therefore the right-hand rule is not valid or does not apply anymore?  That type of contorted twisted nonsensical "debating" style is something you see around here quite often.  Case in point:  Two-plus years ago somebody says, "that must be a dleayed-Lenz effect when my rotor speeds up."  After that hundreds of people talk about the "delayed Lenz effect" without defining it, without qualifying it in terms of what they are observing on their bench, and without even knowing what it means.  Yes, it is as bad as that.

So, there are a few references to Oliver Heaviside dismissing the water-electricity analogy in a 19th century text.  Do we know the context for those statements?  Does the fact that somebody said something in the 19th century have any bearing or relevance on what I said?  Do his comments automatically invalidate my comments?  Can you just brush aside literally thousands of links backing up what I said "just because?"

These kinds of things directly apply to you Chet when you chase after people that aren't credible and all factors are pointing towards them being criminals.

I am 100% comfortable with my statement that water can be an excellent analogy for electricity.  I submit that people are disagreeing with me without even understanding the concept in the first place.

MileHigh

[Dog-One]

I am 100% comfortable with my statement that water can be an excellent analogy for electricity.  I submit that people are disagreeing with me without even understanding the concept in the first place.

The part I am uncomfortable with is water flowing OUTSIDE the pipe.  I have no way to simulate or even visualize that.  If electricity does this and we are using a water analogy, well...   Lets just say it gets difficult.

[ramset]

MH
Yes I appreciate the water analogy and how it applies,I truly appreciated when Miss Lipsnitzle
shared it with Us for the first time in 3rd grade.


twas most enlightening...


I also feel that your latest challengers points are not time sensitive or inappropriate to the discussion.[as noted somewhat by DogOne above]
quite the contrary..and regarding your time stamp on him or Lenz delay,I find that very odd indeed...
I will leave you to your speech um interrogation Ouuhuurr  _discussion_...


thx
Chet