Amperes squared is energy...

On 7/28/2020 12:11 PM, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 12:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:

=================


Where did you come up with this?

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second


** Physical quantities have \"dimensions\" - so suspect that is what it
hints at. But I believe R is a dimensionless quantity.

That may be the slight of hand you are meant to see.


....    Phil


What dimensions resistance has depends on how you pick your fundamental
units. in CGS everything is unambiguously derived from the centimeter,
gram, and second and volts/amp oddly ends up having dimensions of
centimeters/second.

In SI volts/amp has dimensions of (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second.

My Units application says:

You have: ohms
You want:
Definition: ohm = V/A = 1 kg m^2 / A^2 s^3

The \"sleight of hand\" such as it is is that Power = V*I = I^2*R = V^2/R
are all equivalent ways of saying the same thing, if you start with the
physics fact that V*I has units of power, and the (assumption,
empirically-invented idea that sometimes holds) relation that V = IR.

Substituting the different ways of expressing the power relation into
each other, or any way of expressing V = IR for anything there, results
in no novel information, even if you use the dimensions rather than the
symbols.

So it\'s 9 lines of saying the same thing in different ways and then he
ends up with an equation for power same as he started with. And then on
the last line drops the R and a factor of 1/second and ends up with
dimensions of energy, but with no justification at all to do that.
 
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 6:39:58 PM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:51 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 27, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/27/2020 12:50 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
I is current, R is resistance

Power = IIR

Energy = Power * seconds

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

II = Coulomb squared per second squared

IIR = Power

IIR = (Coul^2 / sec^2) * (kg / Coul^2) * (meter^2 / second)

The Coulombs cancel out, combine seconds

IIR = kg * (meter^2 / second^3) = Power

II = kg * (meter^2 / second^2) = Energy

Current squared is energy.

QED


If the energy stored in an inductor, 1/2*L*I^2, is joules, then I^2 by
itself can\'t also be joules unless inductance is dimensionless.

Resistance doesn\'t have dimensions of 1/second as your equations on line
8 and 9 imply.

Hello bitrex,

Error notice:

I made a mistake in the post where I assumed resistance
is per second. I was wrong to skip many steps in the algebra.
I am sorry.

This apology does not change the title assertion :

E = ampere squared

To get the abstract units of measure, where only
meters and seconds are used, the following ideas were used:



Mass equals area: derivation essay

Old science claimed that some units of measure cannot
be factored, such as kilogram, Coulomb, and Farad.
The new science, which I have introduced, factors all
units of measure into meters and seconds.

Outline of the logic and mathematics
____________________________________

1 Understand that electron mobility mu has effectively
the same units of measure as conductance g
(g = 1/R).

2 Use Ohm’s Law and MOSFET current equation to find
that charge is an Area of something. Q = meter^2

Using empirically-derived mathematical models based on simplifying
assumptions of the underlying physics, to define fundamental units to be
used to express quantities of the underlying physics itself, is circular

Hi bitrex,

The advance is made using The Composite Formula:

mass * capacitance = meter^2 * second^2

That advance is the result of realizing that electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different. Like tons and ounces both measuring
the same thing. The name \"electron mobility\" only implies that
an electron is involved, but conductance explicitly includes q,
the electron charge in its formula. So mu = g for units, because
the magnitude does not change the units.

E = ampere squared

has been explained, but it is not accepted by you fine EE folks.

ref.
https://impuremath.wordpress.com/units-of-measure/
 
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 3:23:41 AM UTC-10, John S wrote:
On 7/28/2020 12:11 PM, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 12:28 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:

================

Where did you come up with this?

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second


** Physical quantities have \"dimensions\" - so suspect that is what it
hints at. But I believe R is a dimensionless quantity.

That may be the slight of hand you are meant to see.


....    Phil


What dimensions resistance has depends on how you pick your fundamental
units. in CGS everything is unambiguously derived from the centimeter,
gram, and second and volts/amp oddly ends up having dimensions of
centimeters/second.

In SI volts/amp has dimensions of (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second.


My Units application says:

You have: ohms
You want:
Definition: ohm = V/A = 1 kg m^2 / A^2 s^3

The \"sleight of hand\" such as it is is that Power = V*I = I^2*R = V^2/R
are all equivalent ways of saying the same thing, if you start with the
physics fact that V*I has units of power, and the (assumption,
empirically-invented idea that sometimes holds) relation that V = IR.

Substituting the different ways of expressing the power relation into
each other, or any way of expressing V = IR for anything there, results
in no novel information, even if you use the dimensions rather than the
symbols.

So it\'s 9 lines of saying the same thing in different ways and then he
ends up with an equation for power same as he started with. And then on
the last line drops the R and a factor of 1/second and ends up with
dimensions of energy, but with no justification at all to do that.

Hi John,
your formula for R is the same as my formula because
ampere = coulomb per second.

V/A = kg m^2 / (A^2 s^3)

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

The e=ii formula is not possible to derive unless
advances are made beyond standard science.
Here is the advanced Composite Formula:

kg*Farad = meter^2 * second^2

This is new to science.
 
On 7/29/2020 12:41 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 6:39:58 PM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:51 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 27, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/27/2020 12:50 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
I is current, R is resistance

Power = IIR

Energy = Power * seconds

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

II = Coulomb squared per second squared

IIR = Power

IIR = (Coul^2 / sec^2) * (kg / Coul^2) * (meter^2 / second)

The Coulombs cancel out, combine seconds

IIR = kg * (meter^2 / second^3) = Power

II = kg * (meter^2 / second^2) = Energy

Current squared is energy.

QED


If the energy stored in an inductor, 1/2*L*I^2, is joules, then I^2 by
itself can\'t also be joules unless inductance is dimensionless.

Resistance doesn\'t have dimensions of 1/second as your equations on line
8 and 9 imply.

Hello bitrex,

Error notice:

I made a mistake in the post where I assumed resistance
is per second. I was wrong to skip many steps in the algebra.
I am sorry.

This apology does not change the title assertion :

E = ampere squared

To get the abstract units of measure, where only
meters and seconds are used, the following ideas were used:



Mass equals area: derivation essay

Old science claimed that some units of measure cannot
be factored, such as kilogram, Coulomb, and Farad.
The new science, which I have introduced, factors all
units of measure into meters and seconds.

Outline of the logic and mathematics
____________________________________

1 Understand that electron mobility mu has effectively
the same units of measure as conductance g
(g = 1/R).

2 Use Ohm’s Law and MOSFET current equation to find
that charge is an Area of something. Q = meter^2

Using empirically-derived mathematical models based on simplifying
assumptions of the underlying physics, to define fundamental units to be
used to express quantities of the underlying physics itself, is circular

Hi bitrex,

The advance is made using The Composite Formula:

mass * capacitance = meter^2 * second^2

That advance is the result of realizing that electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different. Like tons and ounces both measuring
the same thing. The name \"electron mobility\" only implies that
an electron is involved, but conductance explicitly includes q,
the electron charge in its formula. So mu = g for units, because
the magnitude does not change the units.

E = ampere squared

has been explained, but it is not accepted by you fine EE folks.

ref.
https://impuremath.wordpress.com/units-of-measure/

Just at an intuitive level it\'s hard to grasp what I^2 being
proportional to energy means in a physical sense. The energy of what?

In theoretical physics energy is \"stored\" in scalar fields, e.g.
electrostatic potential energy is joules and has an associated scalar
field, electric potential, with a well-defined energy density (it
requires energy to assemble a configuration of charged particles and
that energy is \"stored\" in the field between the particles.)
 
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:07:29 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/29/2020 12:41 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 6:39:58 PM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:51 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 27, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/27/2020 12:50 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
I is current, R is resistance

Power = IIR

Energy = Power * seconds

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

II = Coulomb squared per second squared

IIR = Power

IIR = (Coul^2 / sec^2) * (kg / Coul^2) * (meter^2 / second)

The Coulombs cancel out, combine seconds

IIR = kg * (meter^2 / second^3) = Power

II = kg * (meter^2 / second^2) = Energy

Current squared is energy.

QED


If the energy stored in an inductor, 1/2*L*I^2, is joules, then I^2 by
itself can\'t also be joules unless inductance is dimensionless.

Resistance doesn\'t have dimensions of 1/second as your equations on line
8 and 9 imply.

Hello bitrex,

Error notice:

I made a mistake in the post where I assumed resistance
is per second. I was wrong to skip many steps in the algebra.
I am sorry.

This apology does not change the title assertion :

E = ampere squared

To get the abstract units of measure, where only
meters and seconds are used, the following ideas were used:



Mass equals area: derivation essay

Old science claimed that some units of measure cannot
be factored, such as kilogram, Coulomb, and Farad.
The new science, which I have introduced, factors all
units of measure into meters and seconds.

Outline of the logic and mathematics
____________________________________

1 Understand that electron mobility mu has effectively
the same units of measure as conductance g
(g = 1/R).

2 Use Ohm’s Law and MOSFET current equation to find
that charge is an Area of something. Q = meter^2

Using empirically-derived mathematical models based on simplifying
assumptions of the underlying physics, to define fundamental units to be
used to express quantities of the underlying physics itself, is circular

Hi bitrex,

The advance is made using The Composite Formula:

mass * capacitance = meter^2 * second^2

That advance is the result of realizing that electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different. Like tons and ounces both measuring
the same thing. The name \"electron mobility\" only implies that
an electron is involved, but conductance explicitly includes q,
the electron charge in its formula. So mu = g for units, because
the magnitude does not change the units.

E = ampere squared

has been explained, but it is not accepted by you fine EE folks.

ref.
https://impuremath.wordpress.com/units-of-measure/


Just at an intuitive level it\'s hard to grasp what I^2 being
proportional to energy means in a physical sense. The energy of what?

In theoretical physics energy is \"stored\" in scalar fields, e.g.
electrostatic potential energy is joules and has an associated scalar
field, electric potential, with a well-defined energy density (it
requires energy to assemble a configuration of charged particles and
that energy is \"stored\" in the field between the particles.)

I\'m not certain that his machinations are correct since his arguments take tiny steps then large steps rather than consistently showing progress from a starting point to a finish point in even, measured steps.

Even so, he has claimed that \"electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different\" which is not an appropriate conclusion to draw from the fact that the units are the same.

As an example, work is defined as force applied over a distance, W = F * d. An example of the units are Nm. Torque is a measure of rotational force and can have the units of Nm. So does that mean work (energy) and torque are the same thing? Hardly.

Discussing this with the guy will accomplish nothing other than perhaps a deeper understanding of the issue on your own part. He is the guy who proposed 3D solid models for the structure of nuclei in a way that \"explained\" magnetism. No one could get him to explain how these structures could be predicted or explained by any rules (like the ones we use for the electronic structure of the atom). You won\'t get any sort of proper explanation of this issue either.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:07:29 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/29/2020 12:41 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 6:39:58 PM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:51 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 27, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/27/2020 12:50 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
I is current, R is resistance

Power = IIR

Energy = Power * seconds

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

II = Coulomb squared per second squared

IIR = Power

IIR = (Coul^2 / sec^2) * (kg / Coul^2) * (meter^2 / second)

The Coulombs cancel out, combine seconds

IIR = kg * (meter^2 / second^3) = Power

II = kg * (meter^2 / second^2) = Energy

Current squared is energy.

QED


If the energy stored in an inductor, 1/2*L*I^2, is joules, then I^2 by
itself can\'t also be joules unless inductance is dimensionless.

Resistance doesn\'t have dimensions of 1/second as your equations on line
8 and 9 imply.

Hello bitrex,

Error notice:

I made a mistake in the post where I assumed resistance
is per second. I was wrong to skip many steps in the algebra.
I am sorry.

This apology does not change the title assertion :

E = ampere squared

To get the abstract units of measure, where only
meters and seconds are used, the following ideas were used:



Mass equals area: derivation essay

Old science claimed that some units of measure cannot
be factored, such as kilogram, Coulomb, and Farad.
The new science, which I have introduced, factors all
units of measure into meters and seconds.

Outline of the logic and mathematics
____________________________________

1 Understand that electron mobility mu has effectively
the same units of measure as conductance g
(g = 1/R).

2 Use Ohm’s Law and MOSFET current equation to find
that charge is an Area of something. Q = meter^2

Using empirically-derived mathematical models based on simplifying
assumptions of the underlying physics, to define fundamental units to be
used to express quantities of the underlying physics itself, is circular

Hi bitrex,

The advance is made using The Composite Formula:

mass * capacitance = meter^2 * second^2

That advance is the result of realizing that electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different. Like tons and ounces both measuring
the same thing. The name \"electron mobility\" only implies that
an electron is involved, but conductance explicitly includes q,
the electron charge in its formula. So mu = g for units, because
the magnitude does not change the units.

E = ampere squared

has been explained, but it is not accepted by you fine EE folks.

ref.
https://impuremath.wordpress.com/units-of-measure/


Just at an intuitive level it\'s hard to grasp what I^2 being
proportional to energy means in a physical sense. The energy of what?

In theoretical physics energy is \"stored\" in scalar fields, e.g.
electrostatic potential energy is joules and has an associated scalar
field, electric potential, with a well-defined energy density (it
requires energy to assemble a configuration of charged particles and
that energy is \"stored\" in the field between the particles.)

Dear bitrex,
You excellent question is about the energy of current squared.
Around the Sun you can see the magnetic field lines in yellow.
People believe currents cause those colorful arches of flux.
Webers are like amperes, with motions of electrons and protons.
The flux lines cross and break, releasing heat.
Flux lines crossing is described with Weber^2.
For any Weber of magnetic flux lines, there is an Ampere
in current flow lines. The webers are only rotated 90 degrees
from the Amperes.

The Ampere^2 is seen in the Sun crossing flux lines that break
and give energy.

Energy = Weber^2

Alan Folmsbee
 
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:53:08 AM UTC-10, Ricketty C wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:07:29 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/29/2020 12:41 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 6:39:58 PM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 11:51 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 27, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-10, bitrex wrote:
On 7/27/2020 12:50 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
I is current, R is resistance

Power = IIR

Energy = Power * seconds

R = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second

II = Coulomb squared per second squared

IIR = Power

IIR = (Coul^2 / sec^2) * (kg / Coul^2) * (meter^2 / second)

The Coulombs cancel out, combine seconds

IIR = kg * (meter^2 / second^3) = Power

II = kg * (meter^2 / second^2) = Energy

Current squared is energy.

QED


If the energy stored in an inductor, 1/2*L*I^2, is joules, then I^2 by
itself can\'t also be joules unless inductance is dimensionless.

Resistance doesn\'t have dimensions of 1/second as your equations on line
8 and 9 imply.

Hello bitrex,

Error notice:

I made a mistake in the post where I assumed resistance
is per second. I was wrong to skip many steps in the algebra.
I am sorry.

This apology does not change the title assertion :

E = ampere squared

To get the abstract units of measure, where only
meters and seconds are used, the following ideas were used:



Mass equals area: derivation essay

Old science claimed that some units of measure cannot
be factored, such as kilogram, Coulomb, and Farad.
The new science, which I have introduced, factors all
units of measure into meters and seconds.

Outline of the logic and mathematics
____________________________________

1 Understand that electron mobility mu has effectively
the same units of measure as conductance g
(g = 1/R).

2 Use Ohm’s Law and MOSFET current equation to find
that charge is an Area of something. Q = meter^2

Using empirically-derived mathematical models based on simplifying
assumptions of the underlying physics, to define fundamental units to be
used to express quantities of the underlying physics itself, is circular

Hi bitrex,

The advance is made using The Composite Formula:

mass * capacitance = meter^2 * second^2

That advance is the result of realizing that electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different. Like tons and ounces both measuring
the same thing. The name \"electron mobility\" only implies that
an electron is involved, but conductance explicitly includes q,
the electron charge in its formula. So mu = g for units, because
the magnitude does not change the units.

E = ampere squared

has been explained, but it is not accepted by you fine EE folks.

ref.
https://impuremath.wordpress.com/units-of-measure/


Just at an intuitive level it\'s hard to grasp what I^2 being
proportional to energy means in a physical sense. The energy of what?

In theoretical physics energy is \"stored\" in scalar fields, e.g.
electrostatic potential energy is joules and has an associated scalar
field, electric potential, with a well-defined energy density (it
requires energy to assemble a configuration of charged particles and
that energy is \"stored\" in the field between the particles.)

I\'m not certain that his machinations are correct since his arguments take tiny steps then large steps rather than consistently showing progress from a starting point to a finish point in even, measured steps.

Even so, he has claimed that \"electron mobility is
the same unit of measure as conductance with only a magnitude
being different\" which is not an appropriate conclusion to draw from the fact that the units are the same.

As an example, work is defined as force applied over a distance, W = F * d. An example of the units are Nm. Torque is a measure of rotational force and can have the units of Nm. So does that mean work (energy) and torque are the same thing? Hardly.

Discussing this with the guy will accomplish nothing other than perhaps a deeper understanding of the issue on your own part. He is the guy who proposed 3D solid models for the structure of nuclei in a way that \"explained\" magnetism. No one could get him to explain how these structures could be predicted or explained by any rules (like the ones we use for the electronic structure of the atom). You won\'t get any sort of proper explanation of this issue either.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Dear RickittyC,

Thank you for inquiring about a rigorous explanation of iron magnetism
from nuclear structure. Here is a link to the paper in
The Journal of Nuclear Physics:
\"Magnetism from Iron\'s Nuclear Structure\".

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?m=201903

Also, antiferromagnetism is similarly described
in my paper on chromium nuclear structure:

https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/chromium.html

Iron is magnetic because it has two coaxial loops
of protons. Each loop has 12 protons. That was
predicted by Mr. Ampere in 1820. Celebrate 200 years of loops.

Alan Folmsbee, Hawaii
 
Not being a math major...

Isn\'t that obviously wrong since it leaves voltage out of the known
equation?
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top