MH's ideal coil and voltage question

[tinman]

I have started this thread to solve MileHighs question below.
Please keep the insults down,and the language clean.


MH's question.

You have an ideal voltage source and an ideal coil of 5 Henrys.  At time t=0 seconds the coil connects to the ideal voltage source. For three seconds the voltage is 4 volts.  Then for the next two seconds the voltage is zero volts. Then for two seconds the voltage is negative three volts, and then for the next six seconds the voltage is 0.5 volts.  Then after that the voltage is zero volts.
What happens from T=0 when the ideal voltage is connected to the ideal coil?.

My answer to this question is--you cannot place an ideal voltage across an ideal inductor.
The reason being,at T=0,when the ideal voltage is placed across the ideal inductor,the current would rise instantly to a value of infinity. The reason this cannot happen,is because an ideal inductor dose not dissipate any power in the form of heat,due to the fact that it has no resistance or hysteresis loss,as it is an ideal inductor. If an ideal voltage was placed across an ideal inductor(in theory),it would result in an explosion the likes the universe has not seen since the creation of it-the big bang all over again.


All are welcome to have a go at answering MHs question.

MH
For the record,could you please post your answer to your question above?


Brad

[MileHigh]

Brad:

Your answer is wrong and I already answered a more difficult version of the question on the other thread and I already told you I won't answer this question.

You are one strange egg Brad because you think you are "running the show" now but in fact the show is running you.

Re: This posting from the other thread:  http://overunity.com/8341/joule-thief-101/msg483350/#msg483350

As I already stated, you make reference to an "R" resistance but there is none in the example being discussed.  You also make reference to a divide-by-zero for a time constant and state that it is "instantaneous" when it is infinity or undefined.  You are told these two things are wrong in a later posting but like the Pope you pretend that you are infallible and can just "waive" past these two glaring errors because you are Brad.

Re: This posting from the other thread:  http://overunity.com/8341/joule-thief-101/msg483376/#msg483376

You are all in a tizzy because I mention a "'trick' question."  But unfortunately you have another case of crossed signals in your head.  It's not my question in that posting that is the "trick," it's actually ION's follow-up question to my question that is the "trick."  I say in jest to ION that his question is a "trick" question but that flies right over your head.  Lo and behold, the signals get crossed in your head and you accuse me of asking a "trick" question when I did no such thing.

But the most mind-blowing thing about that posting of yours is that you completely gloss over the extremely important and relevant technical information that is contained in that posting.

For me, there are only two outstanding issues and I will mention them again and I will put them in a better sequence this time:

1.  Brad gets up the learning curve and understands the original question and then answers it correctly all by himself and clearly demonstrates that he understands what he is doing.
2.  Brad admits that he is wrong when he stated that my response to the harder question is wrong.

You are stating that you want to try to answer the question.  That's a good thing and your first try is wrong, good luck.

MileHigh

[tinman]

 author=MileHigh link=topic=16589.msg483392#msg483392 date=1462705232]


MileHigh

Your answer is wrong and I already answered a more difficult version of the question on the other thread and I already told you I won't answer this question.

OK
If my answer is wrong,then it is now up to you to prove that by supplying the correct answer.
I have given my answer to your question,and you cannot just say it's wrong without being able to support that claim by supplying what you believe to be the correct answer.
We are only discussing the original question here ATM.

As I already stated, you make reference to an "R" resistance but there is none in the example being discussed.

MH
My reference to resistance is a value of 0 ohms.
Is not 0 ohms resistance no resistance? Your statement makes no sense ,as i do not state any resistance ,as 0 is none. I only say that,so as others reading the question understand that an ideal coil has 0 ohms of resistance--no resistance.

You are one strange egg Brad because you think you are "running the show" now but in fact the show is running you.

I am providing an answer to your question,and now you have to disprove my answer by way of supplying the one you think is correct.

You also make reference to a divide-by-zero for a time constant and state that it is "instantaneous" when it is infinity or undefined.  You are told these two things are wrong in a later posting but like the Pope you pretend that you are infallible and can just "waive" past these two glaring errors because you are Brad.

I am told i am wrong by who MH?

You are all in a tizzy because I mention a "'trick' question."  But unfortunately you have another case of crossed signals in your head.  It's not my question in that posting that is the "trick," it's actually ION's follow-up question to my question that is the "trick."  I say in jest to ION that his question is a "trick" question but that flies right over your head.  Lo and behold, the signals get crossed in your head and you accuse me of asking a "trick" question when I did no such thing.

OK,so lets say that your question above is not a !trick! question as i have stated.
So now i will ask you (as you think i have it wrong)to calculate the time from T=0 in your question,it takes the ideal inductor to reach it's maximum current flow value,once the ideal voltage of 4 volts is placed across that coil.

But the most mind-blowing thing about that posting of yours is that you completely gloss over the extremely important and relevant technical information that is contained in that posting.

You mean IONs response to your question?,once again referring to an ideal voltage from an ideal power supply,being placed over an ideal inductor?.
Well let's leave ION out of this for a while,and let you answer the questions,as it is your question we are talking about here,and so you are the one that should be providing the required answers.

For me, there are only two outstanding issues and I will mention them again and I will put them in a better sequence this time:

1.  Brad gets up the learning curve and understands the original question and then answers it correctly all by himself and clearly demonstrates that he understands what he is doing.

I have answered your question,and i stand by my answer.

2.  Brad admits that he is wrong when he stated that my response to the harder question is wrong.

We are discussing your original question above only, in this thread at the moment.

You are stating that you want to try to answer the question.  That's a good thing and your first try is wrong, good luck.

Regarding the question we are discussing in this thread(your original question to EMJ and Wattsup),i have answered the question correctly. If you believe i am wrong,then you must provide the evidence to show that.

So the questions i have for you MH are
1-how is the current time constant calculated for your ideal inductor/
2-What is the time taken for the current to rise to peak value from T=0,that moment when the ideal voltage of 4 volts is placed across the ideal inductor?.

Lets start with those two question's,and take it from there.


Brad

[MileHigh]

If there is no resistor in the schematic then you do not discuss an imaginary zero-ohm resistor that you want to force into the schematic.  It's a non-starter.

I told you Brad to try to work it out with your peers or work it out by yourself.  I am not going to supply you with the correct answer.  If I did that you would balk anyway and fight over it for 100 postings.  I am not doing that.

"You are wrong."
"Okay, now give me the right answer."

It's not going to work like that.

You should say, "Okay, I will discuss it with my peers and go do more research and learn more and improve my skills so that I can answer the question successfully by myself."

You clearly have no understanding at all about how an inductor actually works.  That is the essence of the question.  Why don't you start there?

[MileHigh]

Stop trolling Webby.  Don't ruin a brand new thread.