MH's ideal coil and voltage question

[Magluvin]

I kind of like it because it stimulates us to think.
I think this discussion is beneficial to all involved as long as Ad Hominem remarks are absent.
The confusion will disappear immediately when you consider the coupling coefficient (k) between these two "separate coils" connected "in parallel".

In an ideal toroid the flux is completly shared and k=-1, thus in fact these coils are connected in anti-parallel when flux direction is considered. Thus they do not posses any inductance collectively. Consequently their anti-parallel combination possesses zero reactance and zero resistance, leading to zero impedance and the current flowing through the voltage source rises immediately to infinity.
It is pretty useless from an engineering standpoint, but it has a great educational value.
Anyway, it is what Tinman was referring to all along while you were apparently analyzing Fig.2.

Great thinking.    It is the reverse of the ideal inductor idea of no current can flow, where in your point here is there is no reactance, and the single inductor has 100% reactance.    In an ideal world.

Mags

[partzman]

Attached is an equivalent circuit of MH's question using ideal components.  The questions are, can we vary Vg and can we use delta I = E*t/L to analyze this circuit? If not, why? The main objection has been the short circuited this and that. I don't see any short circuits.  What an I missing here?

partzman

[MileHigh]

But we will never know,as he never would answer his own question

And isn't it a good thing that I refused to answer the easy question and only answered the hard question, because slowly but surely you are actually learning something now.

[poynt99]

But we agree that the inductor is now a shorted loop,and current is flowing through this circuit loop that includes the ideal voltage source(not to be confused with the ideal voltage,which now has a value of 0 volts)

To quote verpies
So now i ask--
At 0 volts we both agree that we are in a shorted(looped) condition,and a steady current is flowing through this shorted ideal inductor loop,and due to the 0 resistance value,it will continue to flow infinitely.

As I said, I am not arguing against that.

How is this short removed just by turning up the voltage on the ideal voltage source?
If it is not removed,then how are you placing a voltage across this !now shorted! ideal inductor?

The short is not removed. The voltage source itself is the short (if you will), but it doesn't short itself out!

The paradox being-quote verpies-->It is impossible to connect such voltage source across a shorted ideal inductor.

There is no paradox, and verpies is wrong because the inductor does not represent a short the moment it is connected to something, even an ideal voltage source. The only true paradox I've seen so far is verpies' application of an ideal voltage source across an ideal short. Which one wins? That is your paradox Brad.

As I said, talk of such abstract theories as being posed is not helping the understanding here in any way, it is only hindering it.

[MileHigh]

As I said, talk of such abstract theories as being posed is not helping the understanding here in any way, it is only hindering it.

I agree, Verpies is too far out sometimes.  His comments on the thread from a couple of days ago were barely comprehensible.

Verpies:  I suggest that you step it down a notch and add some more description at times so your message is more readily understood by both the "ordinaries" and the "gurus."