K1TTT wrote:
On Jul 30, 5:43Â*pm, wrote:
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

...
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

As you know I do not understand why in XXI century most scientists use
the
hydraulic analogy.

The hydraulic analogy is use to teach basics to children.

The fluxes are for students. The divrotH = 0 also.

Gibberish.

Permittivity and polarisation are from the hydraulic analogy.

Nope, you haven't a clue what permittivity and polarization are.

Now conductivity and electrostriction should be used.

Babbling, word salad, nonsense.

Electrostriction is a new. The "" For frequencies at which dipole
orientations cannot follow the applied Â*field "
is rather old.
Do not stay in Heaviside water.
S*

More gibberish.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

i kind of like the idea of heaviside water... he must be carrying the
water for heaviside. i wonder if he even knows what electrostriction
really is?

That babbling idiot hasn't a clue what ANYTHING really is.

If you read sci.physics.electromag you will find lots of his gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.