On Apr 22, 8:11*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
Another question remains, since it is difficult to
discern from your writings: Have you grasped the
behaviour of an ideal voltage source when current
is flowing into the source?

You now understand that it removes energy from the
circuit?

It follows that it is futile to try to track any
movement of instantaneous energy. You have convinced
me that you are correct - "We don't care where the
(instantaneous) energy goes."

The wordy non-sequitor leaves us with nagging doubts about
whether the fundamentals of DC ideal voltage sources have
been grasped.

If you have that for DC ideal voltage sources, we
can move on to discover what happens with AC ideal
voltage sources. After that, we can go back to what
is happening in your circuit.

Since there is an instantaneous leak in the closed
system, it is useless to proceed.

Doubts now confirmed.

You say you don't
care what happens to the energy. I said a couple of
months ago that I didn't care what happens to
instantaneous power. And indeed, you have convinced
me that any attempt to track instantaneous power is
doomed to failure.

My part 1 article based on a single source and
*AVERAGE* powers doesn't have those conceptual
problems and stands as written. Here's the second
paragraph from that article:

"Please note that any power referred to in this paper
is an AVERAGE POWER. Instantaneous power is beyond the
scope of this article, irrelevant to the following
discussion, and "of limited utility" according to
Eugene Hecht. [4]

Your challenge is to prove that a single source
removes an average amount of energy from the
network.

But since the whole work is predicated on a misunderstanding
of the behaviour of ideal voltage sources, any conclusions
retain no value.

...Keith