Dave wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

Dave wrote:

Cecil, as an engineer you should stick with standard vocabulary.


Just trying to appease the physicists, Dave. They are
arguing that it is not power until work is done.

A Poynting vector is watts/square angle [watts/degree^2]. It is not
being dissipated in free space. It is Diverging [vector relationship].
How do the physics type adjust their definition to include the Poynting
Vector?

I'll sit back and read the follow up posts for the next few weeks :-)



Dave,

Physicists are basically reasonable, but clever, folks. ;-) They define
power as the time rate at which work is done, OR, the time rate at which
energy is transferred. With some imagination applied to the context, the
definitions converge. In the case of the Poynting vector, convergence
(of the definitions) would require dealing with the ultimate destination
of the flowing energy. Might be troublesome in infinite space, but on
earth, all of the energy ultimately produces power.

The problem seems to be the careless use of "power flow" which, if not
meaningless, I find impossible to conceptualize. The flow of the flow of
energy? Sort of like common usage of "current flow", which is also the
flow of a flow.

73,

Chuck


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----