Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 18, 10:48*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote: So you are saying that ideal voltage sources work differently in distributed networks than they do in lumped circuits. "Work differently" is a loaded expression. Since both lumped circuit and distributed network models exist, it is safe to say that the lumped circuit model and the distributed network model indeed "work differently". If they didn't "work differently", there would be no need for both of them to exist. Your previous error is obvious. You were using the lumped circuit model on the left side of Rs and using the distributed network model on the right side of Rs. If it is necessary to use the distributed network model for part of the network, then it is absolutely necessary to be consistent for all of the network. When you switched to the lumped circuit model on the right side of Rs, the energies balanced. When you switch to the distributed network model on the left of Rs, the energies will also balance. The lumped circuit model is a subset of the distributed network model. See:http://www.ttr.com/corum/andhttp://w...1-MASTER-1.pdf Here's some quotes: "Lumped circuit theory fails because it's a *theory* whose presuppositions are inadequate. Every EE in the world was warned of this in their first sophomore circuits course. ... Lumped circuit theory isn't absolute truth, it's only an analytical *theory*. ... Distributed theory encompasses lumped circuits and always applies." It is a good thing I checked the original references, otherwise I would have had to assign Corum and Corum immediately to the flake bucket where they could join some of the other contendors on this group. But no, it turns out they have the appropriate qualifications on all their statements about when it is appropriate to use a lumped analysis and when it is not. And when is lumped okay, when the physical dimensions of the elements can be measured in small fractions of a wavelength. Nothing new there, most of us know that. Let me remind you of the circuit at hand: 50 ohms +----------\/\/\/\/-----------+ +| +| Vsl=100 VDC Vsr=50 VDC | | +-----------------------------+ Firstly, there are no inductors to cause any sort of difficulty. Secondly, it is constructed of ideal components, which have the luxury of being infinitely small. And thirdly, it is a DC circuit so the two points above do not matter any way. So we are back to the question you keep dodging... Where does the energy being absorbed by these ideal voltage sources go? 0+j0 ohms cannot absorb energy. Now that is a non-sequitor. The element absorbing energy is an ideal voltage source, not a resistor. As Eugene Hecht said: "If the quantity to be measured is the net energy per unit area received, it depends on 'T' and is therefore of limited utility. If however, the 'T' is now divided out, a highly practical quantity results, one that corresponds to the average energy per unit area per unit time, namely 'I'." 'I' is the irradiance (*AVERAGE* power density). It is a DC circuit. This means the instantaneous value is the average value. (But poor Hecht, here he is saying power is more useful than cumulative energy, and you misinterpret him to be comparing instantaneous to average. And is it the distribution over the area that is being averaged, or the distribution over time?) You seem to have discovered that "limited utility". You have an instantaneous power calculated over an infinitesimally small amount of time being dissipated or stored in an impedance of 0+j0. Compared to that assertion, the Virgin Birth seems pretty tame. :-) Again, it is a DC circuit since we have had to go back to learning the fundamentals of ideal voltage sources. But back to the simple question... Where does the energy that is flowing into the ideal DC voltage source on the right go? If no energy is flowing into the ideal voltage source on the right, where is the energy that is being continuously provided by the ideal voltage source on left going? Of the 100 W being provided by the ideal source on the left, only 50 W is being dissipated in the resistor. Where goes the remaining 50 W, if not into the ideal voltage source on the right? ...Keith |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Now for the rest of the story! | General | |||
Now for the rest of the story! | Policy | |||
Now for the rest of the story! | General | |||
Now for the rest of the story! | Policy | |||
WTD: Paul Harvey Rest of the Story broadcasts from Sep 1 thru 6 | Broadcasting |