Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:18:03 -0800, "Roger Sparks" wrote: That IS what I said. Think of the velocity as a moving wall, with the capacitor charged behind the wall, uncharged in front of the moving wall. .... Be real. This experiment can be performed, and the DC switched as frequently as desired. How square the wave front will be depends upon real world factors. Go to a transmission line characteristics table and use the formula to compare Zo, capacity per length, and line velocity. It will amaze you. Hi Roger, Take a deep breath, exhale, give what's above some more thought in light of many objections. Now, tells us just what significance any of this has in relation to already well established line mechanics? It certainly isn't different within the confines of its limitations if that is what you are trying to impress upon the group. I suppose for a mental short-cut it has some appeal, we get too many theories here based on approximations to stricter math. One such example is when an equation of approximation has forgotten the underlying |absolute value| and suddenly an inventor arrives with a "new" theory that discovers uses for negative solutions. Further, there is nothing DC about it at all. DC is either static (and in spite of Arthur's corruption of the term, that means no movement whatever) or it is a constant unvarying current. A succession of distributed capacitors rules unvarying current out (and if it isn't already obvious, those unmentioned distributed inductors in one of your links do too) - hence the step, hence the infinity of waves, and from this, real world dispersion which kills the step enough to make that varying current apparent enough so as to remove all doubt. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, The math seems to work, but if you have no use for it, disregard it. On the other hand, if another perspective of electro magnetics that conforms to traditional mathematics can provide additional insight, use it. I am surprised at your criticism in using DC. To me, a square wave is DC for a short time period. Is the observation that a square wave can be described as a series of sine waves troubling to you? Perhaps the observation that a square wave might include waves of a frequency so high that they would not be confined in a normal transmission line is surprising or troubling to you? My goal is to better understand electromagnetic phenomena. You have given some very astute insight many times in the past and thanks for that. Negative comment is equally valuable, but sometimes a little harder to swallow. 73, Roger, W7WKB |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|