John S wrote:

On 7/20/2015 4:06 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/19/2015 9:16 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/10/2015 7:38 PM, John S wrote:

On 7/10/2015 9:30 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
I may not have defined the generator adequately. I meant that the
generator will supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.


That is your fallacy. A generator (not even a theoretical ideal one)
will not supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.

In what way is it a fallacy? There are theoretically only two possible
conditions where it is impossible. Do you know what those two conditions
are?

I should not be asking that question. I should be supplying some
information. I apologize.

The two conditions are a zero ohm load and an open circuit (infinite
load). It is not theoretically possible to put power into either. Those
two conditions require a source such that the results are,
mathematically, undefined.

But ALL other conditions are theoretically possible.

I don't think a true open circuit is actually possible, though one can
make a pretty good approximation.



Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.



--
Roger Hayter

On 7/20/2015 9:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/20/2015 4:06 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/19/2015 9:16 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/10/2015 7:38 PM, John S wrote:

On 7/10/2015 9:30 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
I may not have defined the generator adequately. I meant that the
generator will supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.


That is your fallacy. A generator (not even a theoretical ideal one)
will not supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.

In what way is it a fallacy? There are theoretically only two possible
conditions where it is impossible. Do you know what those two conditions
are?

I should not be asking that question. I should be supplying some
information. I apologize.

The two conditions are a zero ohm load and an open circuit (infinite
load). It is not theoretically possible to put power into either. Those
two conditions require a source such that the results are,
mathematically, undefined.

But ALL other conditions are theoretically possible.

I don't think a true open circuit is actually possible, though one can
make a pretty good approximation.



Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

Even if a conductor has no dissipative resistance, won't all conductors
have radiation resistance? It is normally so small that it can be
ignored, but in the case of a true zero ohm conductor it would be more
significant.

--

Rick

rickman wrote:

On 7/20/2015 9:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/20/2015 4:06 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/19/2015 9:16 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/10/2015 7:38 PM, John S wrote:

On 7/10/2015 9:30 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
I may not have defined the generator adequately. I meant that the
generator will supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.


That is your fallacy. A generator (not even a theoretical ideal one)
will not supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.

In what way is it a fallacy? There are theoretically only two possible
conditions where it is impossible. Do you know what those two conditions
are?

I should not be asking that question. I should be supplying some
information. I apologize.

The two conditions are a zero ohm load and an open circuit (infinite
load). It is not theoretically possible to put power into either. Those
two conditions require a source such that the results are,
mathematically, undefined.

But ALL other conditions are theoretically possible.

I don't think a true open circuit is actually possible, though one can
make a pretty good approximation.



Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

Even if a conductor has no dissipative resistance, won't all conductors
have radiation resistance? It is normally so small that it can be
ignored, but in the case of a true zero ohm conductor it would be more
significant.

Good point. And does a superconducting electromagnet show a real
resistance when the field does mechanical work? Naive thermodynamics
would seem to suggest it should, but the maths is well beyond me.


--
Roger Hayter

On 7/20/2015 9:28 AM, rickman wrote:
On 7/20/2015 9:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/20/2015 4:06 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/19/2015 9:16 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/10/2015 7:38 PM, John S wrote:

On 7/10/2015 9:30 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
I may not have defined the generator adequately. I meant that the
generator will supply one watt regardless of the impedance it
sees.


That is your fallacy. A generator (not even a theoretical ideal
one)
will not supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.

In what way is it a fallacy? There are theoretically only two
possible
conditions where it is impossible. Do you know what those two
conditions
are?

I should not be asking that question. I should be supplying some
information. I apologize.

The two conditions are a zero ohm load and an open circuit (infinite
load). It is not theoretically possible to put power into either.
Those
two conditions require a source such that the results are,
mathematically, undefined.

But ALL other conditions are theoretically possible.

I don't think a true open circuit is actually possible, though one can
make a pretty good approximation.



Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

Even if a conductor has no dissipative resistance, won't all conductors
have radiation resistance? It is normally so small that it can be
ignored, but in the case of a true zero ohm conductor it would be more
significant.

Yes, except at zero frequency.

On 7/20/2015 8:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/20/2015 4:06 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

On 7/19/2015 9:16 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/10/2015 7:38 PM, John S wrote:

On 7/10/2015 9:30 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
I may not have defined the generator adequately. I meant that the
generator will supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.


That is your fallacy. A generator (not even a theoretical ideal one)
will not supply one watt regardless of the impedance it sees.

In what way is it a fallacy? There are theoretically only two possible
conditions where it is impossible. Do you know what those two conditions
are?

I should not be asking that question. I should be supplying some
information. I apologize.

The two conditions are a zero ohm load and an open circuit (infinite
load). It is not theoretically possible to put power into either. Those
two conditions require a source such that the results are,
mathematically, undefined.

But ALL other conditions are theoretically possible.

I don't think a true open circuit is actually possible, though one can
make a pretty good approximation.



Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

I thought I made it clear that we are talking theoretically. If we are,
super conduction is moot. Yes, a source can approach, but not achieve,
infinite voltage or current. Also, as I said earlier, it is not infinite
but is undefined or unbounded mathematically. We call it infinite so we
can wrap our heads around the concept.

We can discuss "possible" rather than theoretical if you prefer. We
would then need to to define how good is a short circuit or an open
circuit and put numbers to them. How do we define the source so that we
agree on its properties? I am eager to discuss these things, so please
present a possible scenario for us to discuss.

On 7/20/2015 10:43 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/20/2015 8:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

I thought I made it clear that we are talking theoretically. If we are,
super conduction is moot. Yes, a source can approach, but not achieve,
infinite voltage or current. Also, as I said earlier, it is not infinite
but is undefined or unbounded mathematically. We call it infinite so we
can wrap our heads around the concept.

We can discuss "possible" rather than theoretical if you prefer. We
would then need to to define how good is a short circuit or an open
circuit and put numbers to them. How do we define the source so that we
agree on its properties? I am eager to discuss these things, so please
present a possible scenario for us to discuss.

So can we all agree that a source can supply a fixed power to a load?

--

Rick

On 7/20/2015 11:09 AM, rickman wrote:
On 7/20/2015 10:43 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/20/2015 8:46 AM, Roger Hayter wrote:
John S wrote:

Correct. And neither is a true short circuit. But, I was sticking to
theoretical conditions rather than getting into how much of a short or
open circuit really is.

Would a superconductor not be a true short circuit? Anyway, I thought
you were specifically talking about what was "possible" rather than
theoretical limits. Your all-purpose 1 W amplifier could have an output
voltage or current than approached infinity as the output load
approached open circuit and short circuit, if you are still talking
theoretically.

I thought I made it clear that we are talking theoretically. If we are,
super conduction is moot. Yes, a source can approach, but not achieve,
infinite voltage or current. Also, as I said earlier, it is not infinite
but is undefined or unbounded mathematically. We call it infinite so we
can wrap our heads around the concept.

We can discuss "possible" rather than theoretical if you prefer. We
would then need to to define how good is a short circuit or an open
circuit and put numbers to them. How do we define the source so that we
agree on its properties? I am eager to discuss these things, so please
present a possible scenario for us to discuss.

So can we all agree that a source can supply a fixed power to a load?


Well, speaking for myself, YES, but within the constraints that it
cannot supply power to a theoretical short circuit nor a theoretical
open circuit. For example, EZNEC allows a power source. Do you have and
use EZNEC? I think you know you can get a demo for free, yes?

Would you care to discuss a different scenario?

On 7/20/2015 12:22 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/20/2015 11:09 AM, rickman wrote:

So can we all agree that a source can supply a fixed power to a load?


Well, speaking for myself, YES, but within the constraints that it
cannot supply power to a theoretical short circuit nor a theoretical
open circuit. For example, EZNEC allows a power source. Do you have and
use EZNEC? I think you know you can get a demo for free, yes?

Would you care to discuss a different scenario?

I'd just like to not discuss the minutia. There are some smart people
here and I can learn a lot, but not when people start debating how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.

--

Rick

rickman wrote:

On 7/20/2015 12:22 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/20/2015 11:09 AM, rickman wrote:

So can we all agree that a source can supply a fixed power to a load?


Well, speaking for myself, YES, but within the constraints that it
cannot supply power to a theoretical short circuit nor a theoretical
open circuit. For example, EZNEC allows a power source. Do you have and
use EZNEC? I think you know you can get a demo for free, yes?

Would you care to discuss a different scenario?

I'd just like to not discuss the minutia. There are some smart people
here and I can learn a lot, but not when people start debating how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Fair enough, but do let others do it because it is sometimes the
minutiae and the limiting cases that make it easier to understand the
average case.



--
Roger Hayter

On 7/20/2015 5:59 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
rickman wrote:

On 7/20/2015 12:22 PM, John S wrote:
On 7/20/2015 11:09 AM, rickman wrote:

So can we all agree that a source can supply a fixed power to a load?


Well, speaking for myself, YES, but within the constraints that it
cannot supply power to a theoretical short circuit nor a theoretical
open circuit. For example, EZNEC allows a power source. Do you have and
use EZNEC? I think you know you can get a demo for free, yes?

Would you care to discuss a different scenario?

I'd just like to not discuss the minutia. There are some smart people
here and I can learn a lot, but not when people start debating how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Fair enough, but do let others do it because it is sometimes the
minutiae and the limiting cases that make it easier to understand the
average case.

It's not so much the minutia I don't care for, it is the *arguing* over
minutia and then insulting one another that I don't care for. I mean,
really! How many posts were made regarding whether it was
realistic/possible/worthwhile to use an example with a source supplying
a fixed power to different loads? By the time that was discussed I
don't think anyone remembered the point actually being discussed.

--

Rick