Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #597694

Re: (A*R)' = A'*R + R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1 + V*(R^-1)'

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/20/2016 12:12 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 9:41:53 PM UTC-5, Serigo wrote:
>> On 9/19/2016 9:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 5:27:16 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney
>>> wrote:
>>>> Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>> (snip)
>>>>
>>>>> The Magnetic Field is always a vector, regardless of any
>>>>> operation placed upon it. That is the meaning of dipole.
>>>>> Something like a parrot of understanding cannot grasp for
>>>>> themselves until told. Dipole means Magnetism requires a Field to
>>>>> mediate the two poles, and hence a vector is involved.

>>>> The magnetic field is a vector, yes, but not for the reasons you
>>>> give.
>>>
>>> Oh, was it Serigo that whispered in your ear that you were dumb wrong
>>> by thinking a magnetic field is a vector only on how it was derived.
>>> Eh, what stupidity you have, and why you failed physics.
>>
>> electric field, magnetic field, are vector fields, if you dont know
>> that, you have no chance at all with Maxwells equations,
>>
>> Your old posts from 2012 show you were working on maxwell back then, how
>> did it go ?
>
> So, what happens when you take the derivative of V*R^-1, V is voltage, R is resistance



> (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1  +  V*(R^-1)'

dV/R - V*dR/r^2    now what ?

with respect to time ?




>
> Likewise what happens with
>
> (A*R)' = A'*R  +  R'*A  where A is current and R is resistance.
>
> Note: I will make R be that of the Lenz B field, so in the end, R is a magnetic field, pure magnetic field.
>
> Can you get any traction Serigo?
>
> AP
>

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 15:07 -0700
  How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 17:25 -0700
  Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-18 20:32 -0500
    Magnetic Field in most-everything Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 19:38 -0700
      Re: Magnetic Field in most-everything Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 15:51 +0000
        people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 13:07 -0700
          Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 16:15 -0500
            Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 14:29 -0700
              Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 19:51 -0500
                Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 19:41 -0700
                Re: Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 09:55 -0500
                Re: Faraday law looks like (V*R^-1)' = A*R + B + constant; Ampere law looks like (A*R)' = B + V*A^-1 + constant "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-20 09:03 -0700
          Re: people that do not understand that if you have a Magnetic Field which is always a vector, that multiples thereof are also vectors moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 22:26 +0000
            This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 19:23 -0700
              Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-19 21:41 -0500
                (A*R)' = A'*R  +  R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1  +  V*(R^-1)' Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 22:12 -0700
                derivative of magnetic field Re: (A*R)' = A'*R  +  R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1  +  V*(R^-1)' Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 23:45 -0700
                Re: (A*R)' = A'*R + R'*A and derivative (V*R^-1)' = V'*R^-1 + V*(R^-1)' Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 10:09 -0500
              Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-20 04:08 +0000
                Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 10:28 -0500
                Re: This moron thought a magnetic field is only a vector dependent on how it was derived Re: people that do not understand moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-20 16:40 +0000
    Someone in Old Physics trying to flesh out Faraday's law Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:03 -0700
      Re: Someone in Old Physics trying to flesh out Faraday's law Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-18 22:31 -0500
        Old Physics Faraday law math does not match the experiment Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:51 -0700
          math that matches is the Product Rule in Differentiation that gives a Lenz law inside of Faraday law Re: Old Physics Faraday law math does not match the experiment Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 02:47 -0700
    trying to teach a brainwashed that velocity on Magnetic Field is just another Magnetic Field Re: How to gather the missing terms in Faraday Law, and yes, Maxwell goofed here Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 20:20 -0700

csiph-web