Inductance and Inertia

Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 5:49 PM

This is what I thought of yesterday:
Does conversation of momentum has anything to do with the phenomena
of inductance? A broader question would be: Does the law which is
obeyed in the realm of force have anything to with the law obeyed in
the realm of electromagnetic?
The phenomena of inductance can be consider simply as the
‘resistance’ of a conducting material to be charged, or to conduct
electricity. Why? The reason textbook cited is that have something to
do E-M induction, and it dissipate energy in the process. Looking it
from the perspective of inertia, we could restate this phenomena as a
uncharged conductor try to maintain its electric-magnetic inertia
against the state of being charged. Originally, the electric-magnetic
inertia of this conductor is zero. Now an electrical impulse is acted
upon this medium to change its original state of zero E-M inertia to
the state of some E-M inertia. Energy input to required to change the
medium’s E-M inertia. Does it sound all too similar to the Newton’s
law of motion for physical object to you?
Let me list the terms and their comparative counterpart for you
here: Impulse force/Electrical Impulse, inertia/E-M inertia,
acceleration/charging, deceleration/discharging, constant speed/state
of constant E-M inertia or constant electrical currency.
Base on this analogy, we should expect the Inductance phenomena
would ONLY happen when there is a change of state of a medium’s E-M
inertia, i.e. when the electrical currency passing through it increase
or decrease, otherwise it would require NO extra energy when the
electrical currency is constant. The amount of energy dissipate on
inductance is only proportional to the DIFFERENCE in electrical
currency but NOT the amount of electrical currency. Different medium
may also different parameter input into an unchanging formula for
inductance since medium provide the structure for this reaction to
take place.
Yet a reverse application of this analogy would indicate that a
certain amount of initialization energy is wasted in the process of
accelerate or decelerate an physical object, as some minimum level of
energy is required to initialize the acceleration or deceleration
process. i.e. We should expect an even lower percentage of energy
input to an object is transferred to the kinetic energy of that
object. i.e. Force*Distance =/= kinetic energy + friction
Notice that we haven’t yet taken into account the relationship
between process of acceleration/deceleration of a physical object and
the microscopic E-M properties of that physical object. As the detail
of an impulse acting on a physical in microscopic level is well worth
another thesis, it is suffice to state here that the transferring of
kinetic energy from the side in contact with the impulse to the other
side DEPENDING critically of many E-M field interacting with each
other. So the properties of conservation in the level of physical
object maybe a direct consequence of many laws of conservation in the
E-M field. In other words, the former is merely an expression/ a
special case/ a consequence of the later. What is not understandable
in the physical realm may found explanation in the microscopic realm.

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: