Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... Roy Lewallen wrote in : Correction: Roy Lewallen wrote: Superposition means the following: If f(x) is the result of excitation x and f(y) is the result of excitation y, then the result of excitation (x + y) is f(x + y). . . That should read: Superposition means the following: If f(x) is the result of excitation x and f(y) is the result of excitation y, then the result of excitation (x + y) is f(x) + f(y). . . ^^^^^^^^^^^ I apologize for the error. Thanks very much to David Ryeburn for spotting it. Fine Roy, the maths is easy, but you don't discuss the eligible quantities. As I learned the superposition theoram applying to circuit analysis, it was voltages or currents that could be superposed. Presumably, for EM fields in space, the electric field strength and magnetic field strength from multiple source can be superposed to obtain resultant fields, as well as voltages or currents in any circuit elements excited by those waves. For avoidance of doubt, power is not a quantity to be superposed, though presumably if it can be deconstructed to voltage or current or electric field strength or magnetic field strength (though that may require additional information), then those components may be superposed. The resultant fields at a point though seem to not necessarily contain sufficient information to infer the existence of a wave, just one wave, or any specific number of waves, so the superposed resultant at a single point is by itself of somewhat limited use. This one way process where the resultant doesn't characterise the sources other than at the point seems to support the existence of the source waves independently of each other, and that there is no merging of the waves. Is anything above contentious or just plain wrong? Owen yes, superposition is meant to work directly on voltage, current, electric fields, and magnetic fields. it can be extended by adding appropriate extra phase terms to power or intensity as cecil prefers to use. you are at least partially correct. a measurement at a single point at a single time can only give the sum of the fields at the instant of measurement. make a series of measurements at a point over time and you can infer the existance of different frequency waves passing the point, but not anything about their direction or possibly multiple components. add measurements at enought other points and you can resolve directional components, polarization, etc. assuming your points are properly distributed... this means that a small probe (like a scope probe) can only make a record of voltages/currents or fields at a single point and can't tell anything about direction. add a second probe and you could detect the direction of travel of waves on a wire. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave wrote:
yes, superposition is meant to work directly on voltage, current, electric fields, and magnetic fields. it can be extended by adding appropriate extra phase terms to power or intensity as cecil prefers to use. That seems to be common knowledge except for some (narrow-minded?) posters here. Powers do not superpose but there is a method of adding power (densities) that has been acceptable to physicists for at least a century and may date back to Young, Fresnel, and Huygens. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in news:ZPmWh.759$dM1.190@trndny07:
"Owen Duffy" wrote in message ... Roy Lewallen wrote in : Correction: Roy Lewallen wrote: Superposition means the following: If f(x) is the result of excitation x and f(y) is the result of excitation y, then the result of excitation (x + y) is f(x + y). . . That should read: Superposition means the following: If f(x) is the result of excitation x and f(y) is the result of excitation y, then the result of excitation (x + y) is f(x) + f(y). . . ^^^^^^^^^^^ I apologize for the error. Thanks very much to David Ryeburn for spotting it. Fine Roy, the maths is easy, but you don't discuss the eligible quantities. As I learned the superposition theoram applying to circuit analysis, it was voltages or currents that could be superposed. Presumably, for EM fields in space, the electric field strength and magnetic field strength from multiple source can be superposed to obtain resultant fields, as well as voltages or currents in any circuit elements excited by those waves. For avoidance of doubt, power is not a quantity to be superposed, though presumably if it can be deconstructed to voltage or current or electric field strength or magnetic field strength (though that may require additional information), then those components may be superposed. The resultant fields at a point though seem to not necessarily contain sufficient information to infer the existence of a wave, just one wave, or any specific number of waves, so the superposed resultant at a single point is by itself of somewhat limited use. This one way process where the resultant doesn't characterise the sources other than at the point seems to support the existence of the source waves independently of each other, and that there is no merging of the waves. Is anything above contentious or just plain wrong? Owen yes, superposition is meant to work directly on voltage, current, electric fields, and magnetic fields. it can be extended by adding appropriate extra phase terms to power or intensity as cecil prefers to use. you are at least partially correct. a measurement at a single point at a single time can only give the sum of the fields at the instant of measurement. make a series of measurements at a point over time and Dave, I was continuing in the assumed context of coherent sources. you can infer the existance of different frequency waves passing the point, but not anything about their direction or possibly multiple components. add measurements at enought other points and you can resolve directional components, polarization, etc. assuming your points are properly distributed... this means that a small probe (like a scope probe) can only make a record of voltages/currents or fields at a single point and can't tell anything about direction. add a second probe and you could detect the direction of travel of waves on a wire. Yes, I understand.... Thanks. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
freedom and independence | Homebrew | |||
Independence from the King and from God | Shortwave | |||
Happy Independence Day to All! | CB | |||
Traveling Waves, Power Waves,..., Any Waves,... | Antenna | |||
Happy Independence Day | Policy |