MH's ideal coil and voltage question

[MileHigh]

Brad:

Okay, so you are copping out yet again and you refuse to provide an example of CEMF being less than EMF for an EMF source driving a coil - because you can't.  Instead, you try useless misdirection.

It is the value of the CEMF induced current that must be less to allow current to flow,and the self induced current can only be less that the EMF induced current,if there is winding resistance.

Why don't you back up your claim and plot the "CEMF induced current" and the regular EMF induced current on a graph.  Also plot the net current.  Try doing that for a real inductor and an ideal inductor.  I have a feeling you might start getting cold feet and confused when you actually try putting your claims down on paper in graphical form.

You hit another doozy and it's also a double whammy.  "Lye" is a strongly alkaline solution, especially of potassium hydroxide, used for washing or cleansing.  When I say "nobody questions them" I am talking about the physical world real life analogies.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Brad:





You hit another doozy and it's also a double whammy.  "Lye" is a strongly alkaline solution, especially of potassium hydroxide, used for washing or cleansing.  When I say "nobody questions them" I am talking about the physical world real life analogies.

MileHigh

Lol-your greatest victory is on a typo? lol

Okay, so you are copping out yet again and you refuse to provide an example of CEMF being less than EMF for an EMF source driving a coil - because you can't.  Instead, you try useless misdirection.

Like i said MH,you show me that you can measure the value of the CEMF,and i will show you that the CEMF induced current must be less than that of the EMF induced current,in order for there to be a current flow.fq

Why don't you back up your claim and plot the "CEMF induced current" and the regular EMF induced current on a graph.  Also plot the net current.  Try doing that for a real inductor and an ideal inductor.  I have a feeling you might start getting cold feet and confused when you actually try putting your claims down on paper in graphical form.

I have a feeling that you only know what you read,and have no idea to actually what is what.

What is the difference in how a BackEMf is produced to that of a CEMF,as far as the mechanism that creates both?.


Brad

[MileHigh]

I'm not sure that it was a typo.

Like i said MH,you show me that you can measure the value of the CEMF,and i will show you that the CEMF induced current must be less than that of the EMF induced current,in order for there to be a current flow.fq

Here is the chicken and egg argument split into two.

With the 5 Henry ideal inductor, if you connect it across a programmable current source that outputs a linear ramp of current at 0.8 amps per second, you will measure 4 volts of CEMF across the inductor.

With the 5 Henry ideal inductor, if you connect it across a 4-volt DC voltage source then you will measure a linear ramp of current at 0.8 amps per second.  Some people will say that is CEMF, but I view it as clamping 4 volts across the inductor and pushing current through it and overcoming the electrical inertia of the coil.

In a way, it's neither here or there, or chicken or egg, because you still have the same increasing current, and the same voltage across the coil.

Now, are you going to give your own example where the CEMF must allegedly be less than the EMF for current to flow or are you just going to say it without offering any substance to back up your claim?

You are non-responsive on my reasonable request for you to make a current vs. time graph for the "CEMF current" and the EMF current and the net current to back up your claim.

I think I see a pattern here.  You like to put forth your own pie-in-the-sky theories that you are pretty damn sure are true, but when you are asked to offer some substance to your claims then you are a man of 1000 excuses.

I challenge you to back up your claim and graph the two currents and the net current for both a real inductor and an ideal inductor.  Let's see if the Tinmanese makes sense or if it is just gobbledygook.

[tinman]

I'm not sure that it was a typo.

Here is the chicken and egg argument split into two.

With the 5 Henry ideal inductor, if you connect it across a programmable current source that outputs a linear ramp of current at 0.8 amps per second, you will measure 4 volts of CEMF across the inductor.

With the 5 Henry ideal inductor, if you connect it across a 4-volt DC voltage source then you will measure a linear ramp of current at 0.8 amps per second.  Some people will say that is CEMF, but I view it as clamping 4 volts across the inductor and pushing current through it and overcoming the electrical inertia of the coil.

In a way, it's neither here or there, or chicken or egg, because you still have the same increasing current, and the same voltage across the coil.

Now, are you going to give your own example where the CEMF must allegedly be less than the EMF for current to flow or are you just going to say it without offering any substance to back up your claim?

You are non-responsive on my reasonable request for you to make a current vs. time graph for the "CEMF current" and the EMF current and the net current to back up your claim.

I think I see a pattern here.  You like to put forth your own pie-in-the-sky theories that you are pretty damn sure are true, but when you are asked to offer some substance to your claims then you are a man of 1000 excuses.

I challenge you to back up your claim and graph the two currents and the net current for both a real inductor and an ideal inductor.  Let's see if the Tinmanese makes sense or if it is just gobbledygook.

So once again,it is the same old same old
A continuous claim that the CEMF is equal to the EMF,but current still flows,with no explanation as to how. Why is one electromotive force equal and opposite to another electromotive force,but a direction of current flow can be obtained.

Time and time again,i have asked where is the imbalance that allows current to flow,and time and time again,all i get is--when .8 amps of current is flowing through the 5h coil,we get a CEMF value of 4 volts.

Everything that has been said,is to fit this !! .8 amps a second!! must flow through a 5H coil,with no reason as to how it can be, when the CEMF value is equal to that of the EMF.
No one yet has defined as to where the loss is,and if the CEMF value is equal to that of the EMF value,then there must be a loss for current to flow-->where is this loss-->where is this reaction that is not equal to the action that created it?,when there is no energy dissipation from the system.

PW states some sort of feed back system that has a smooth transition. All well and good,but why is the feed back less than that which was fed into the system in the first place.

Everything keeps going around in a circle to fit this !!must be .8 amps a second for a 5H coil !!,-because that's whats in the books.
So ,for the last time-->where is the loss in this !!feed back!! system,that allows an offset,to allow current to flow?.


Brad

[tinman]

I challenge you to back up your claim and graph the two currents and the net current for both a real inductor and an ideal inductor.  Let's see if the Tinmanese makes sense or if it is just gobbledygook.

I challenge you MH,to measure and show us all here,the CEMF value in real time.

After you have done that,you send me an ideal coil,and i will carry out the experiment

It will not be done using only numbers supplied by those that had no ideal coils to make such claims that there would be no difference between ideal and non ideal.


Brad