ARGUMENT: Electronic Fundamentals

Ok, I have an argument with my instructor in this class. It's not so much the points missed on the test as it is the aspect in which he insists is correct.

Ohm's Law: Current is directly proportionate to Voltage and inversely proportionate to Resistance.

This verbage has been translated into a formula:
E
___
I*R

(E over I times R) or E / (I * R)

The question was, "According to Ohm's Law, what is the relationship between Voltage and Resistance".

Before I go into my argument, anyone here know for sure, and understand, the answer?

The answer he insists is they are NOT RELATED. Okay, now, I can understand the fact that Ohm's Law does not directly state a relation between the two, but this is not the same as having no relation. He also says that changing the Voltage will not change the resistance [yes, true], and vise/versa [only true with Applied Voltage], and that this is why there is no relation.

My argument is mathematical, and I would love to hear any sides of this. In an equation, if a variable is included, it is then related to all other variables in that equation. And as well, you can not just remove the voltage from that equation, as you will no longer have Ohm's Law. Therefore, by logical conclusion based on mathematical rules (the purpose of Ohm's Law being to put electronics into solvable equation), the Voltage is related to both the Current and the Resistance, as they all intermingle. If you were to plug in their values, the equation will always read:

E / (I * R) = 1

A quick example of relation in algebra:

X = 2 * Y
Z has no relation to X
Z = Y / 2
Z still has no relation to X, but if both are true (AND being the boolean, not OR), then X and Z has developed a relation:

X is four times Z [ x = 4Z ]
or v/v:
Z is one fourth of X [ Z = X / 4 ]

I believe to put in in an equation similar to Ohm's Law:

(Z + (X/4))/Y = 1 or in another form: Z + (X/4) = Y

DIM POST, STUPID
POST = INPUT $X
STUPID = PEEK 420, 255
IF POST >= STUPID, THEN GOTO H3LL

Add a reply

Register or log in to remove.

You are correct and your instructor is wrong. What he says is only true if you allow current to change. The equation a=b*c is exactly the same as e=i*r. In the case of a=b*c, a is directly proportional to b and a is direcly proportional to c as well. b and c are inversely proportional to one another. When talking about these type of relationships you always assume the 3rd variable is constant. If we want to explore the relationship between a and b then assuming c is constant a will go up when b goes up, and a will be down when b is down, this is a direct relationship. Getting back to the original equation of e=i*r holding current constant voltage is directly proportional to resistance for the same reason a is directly proportonal to c.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.Edited by LAKEDUDE on 05/15/02 07:47 PM.

Reply to lakedude

actually, there's no direct relation between Voltage and resistance.

Resistance is a property of the Substance through which you are passing current.

Voltage is a measure of charge taken between two places.

there's no direct relation. infact there's SO no relation i couldn';t even come up with a synonym.

Voltage and resistance are both frames of reference...
as an example.. 1,000,000,000 volts, at @0.002 amps is a gentle tingle.

1,000,000,000 Amps at 0.002Volts will kill you, they guy next to you, hell. that much current will arc to the sodding moon....

whatever provides positive bouyancy for your aquious transport vehicle

Reply to Golden1

I think my speakers are marked at that many amps. ;-)

nitpicking: the property of the substance is resistivity. resistance is derived from that and the dimensions of the particular "peice" of that substance.

A man is only as old as the woman he feels

Reply to HolyGrenade

I know what voltage and resistance are and you are correct that they are not by themselves directly related. However within the context of the formula for Ohm's law they have a direct relationship as I have already described. Holding voltage constant, current and resistance have an inverse relationship.

Quote :

1,000,000,000 Amps at 0.002Volts will kill you, they guy next to you, hell. that much current will arc to the sodding moon....

This is very incorrect. In order to ark to the moon you would need a huge voltage and current has nothing to do with it. It is true that a high voltage source that is current limited will not kill you. A source that can deliver a high current will also not kill you or the guy next to you if there is not enough voltage to push the current. What kills you is the current at the heart. Your body has many paths for current to flow and at 0.002v almost no current is going to go anywhere because of your body's resistance. Your skin when dry has a very high resistance and you need voltage to overcome that resistance if you are trying to kill yourself. Actually you are helping me make my point. Yes 1,000,000,000 amps going across your body will cook you into a cinder and you will be quite dead. With dry skin your body's resistance is around 1 M Ohm. Doing the math even with 1,000,000,000 amps available I = E/R so at .002v and a resistance of 1,000,000 Ohms the actual current in your body would be around .000000002 amps which ain't gonna do anything. A car battery is a perfect example. A car battery has more then enough total energy to kill you but it is only pushing 12vdc so no matter how big the battery is (from motorcycle to truck) the total current in your body will always be around 12v/1,000,000 Ohms or about .000012 amps. The only way to get more current out of a battery is to lower the resistance. Go find me the biggest 12v battey you can find and I'll be happy to grab the wires and prove it to you.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.Edited by lakedude on 05/17/02 06:15 PM.

Reply to lakedude

Can I sell some tickets to that one?

Would you put both electrodes to your tongue at the same time? Ouch!

I remember as a small child putting my tongue (do not ask why, cos I don't know) to both the electrodes on a 9v +/- battery. You know, the ones used for kids electronic games.

AAAAAAHHHHHHH! It nips.

~ What do you mean "It isn't working!"...Now where's my sonic screwdriver? ~

Reply to camieabz

Quote :

Would you put both electrodes to your tongue at the same time?

No I will NOT put my tongue on it!!!!

The reason a 9v will zap you tongue is because your tongue is wet and has lower resistance then the drier parts of your body. What does a 9v do when you touch both electrodes with dry fingers? Nothing because the resistance in your fingers is too high to allow much current.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.

Reply to lakedude

Everyone BTW the question originally was not how is voltage and current related but :

"According to Ohm's Law, what is the relationship between Voltage and Resistance".

With all other variables staying the same, According to Ohm's law they are directly porportional. Who ever does not understand this does not understand the language of basic algebra. It is a math question and direct relationship is the correct math answer. Please allow me an example with actual numbers:

In a circuit lets say we have 6volts across a pot set to 3ohms with a circuit current of 2amps. Since E=IR we have 6 = 2*3. If we raise the voltage to 12volts we must also raise the resistance of the pot to 6ohms to keep the current at 2amps 12 = 2*6 otherwise if voltage and resistance are not related we would get 12 = 2*3 which is incorrect as 12 does not equal 6.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.

Reply to lakedude

Quote :

Ok, I have an argument with my instructor in this class. It's not so much the points missed on the test as it is the aspect in which he insists is correct.
(E over I times R) or E / (I * R)

The question was, "According to Ohm's Law, what is the relationship between Voltage and Resistance".

Before I go into my argument, anyone here know for sure, and understand, the answer?

The answer he insists is they are NOT RELATED. Okay, now, I can understand the fact that Ohm's Law does not directly state a relation between the two, but this is not the same as having no relation. He also says that changing the Voltage will not change the resistance [yes, true], and vise/versa [only true with Applied Voltage], and that this is why there is no relation.

My argument is mathematical

i think you have here a problem to understand your physics instructor because he reasons like a physicist & you like a mathematician.

in physics we mustnt forget that we must think like physicist & that mathematics are "just a tool" (very helpful to calculate voltage, intensity, resistor) but nothing else. mathematics are applied to physics in function of physics theories, not the opposite.

i think here he tries to put forward the notion of generator.
whatever the circuit, you must have a generator somewhere giving the necessary power on your circuit to doing it work.

a basic generator for a basic circuit:
a basic generator has a fixed voltage & a max limit intensity (x amps)
you can now, in function of the different elements which compose your circuit to calculate whatsoever voltage & intensity, the circuit resistors being fixed.

hoping this could help...

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

Actually, since the rule says pd and Resistance are unrelated, the current must be the variable. Which means, doubling the pd would double the current while the resistance will remain the same.

Think of it this way. If you have a resistor marked 5ohms, in a circuit. No matter what the voltage in the circuit is, the resitor will remain the same. Increasing the pd across circuit will adjust the current in it to match.

A man is only as old as the woman he feels

Reply to HolyGrenade

actually, there's no direct relation between Voltage and resistance.

Resistance is a property of the Substance through which you are passing current.

Voltage is a measure of charge taken between two places.

there's no direct relation. infact there's SO no relation i couldn';t even come up with a synonym.

Voltage and resistance are both frames of reference...
as an example.. 1,000,000,000 volts, at @0.002 amps is a gentle tingle.

1,000,000,000 Amps at 0.002Volts will kill you, they guy next to you, hell. that much current will arc to the sodding moon....

----------------------------------------

Is this what you call an argument?

Next...

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"

Reply to siliconjon

Actually, since the rule says pd and Resistance are unrelated, the current must be the variable. Which means, doubling the pd would double the current while the resistance will remain the same.

Think of it this way. If you have a resistor marked 5ohms, in a circuit. No matter what the voltage in the circuit is, the resitor will remain the same. Increasing the pd across circuit will adjust the current in it to match.

--------------------------------------------
Yes, but Ohm's law does not apply to ONLY this method. There are variable resistors, voltage outs, voltage drops...all types of voltage. The question did not ask about "Applied Voltage", but voltage as a general term, and using logic, would include any voltage to which the formula could be applied to in order to find it's value or calculate the other needed values to get the desired result.

Shew...felt like I just spit that outta my mouth in 2 seconds...that's .5Hz!

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"

Reply to siliconjon

i think you have here a problem to understand your physics instructor because he reasons like a physicist & you like a mathematician.

-------------------------
He's not a physics instructor. He's a "Electronics Fundamentals" Instructor, and considering some of the answers he has spit out in class, I'm not sure he fully understands the concepts he's supposed to be teaching. I have asked some questions that go beyond the realm of this class, but very much apply to electronics, to which his answer was "I don't know". Wish I could think of a specific example...but I'm sure it will pop up again, and I will take not as to have a good example for you all.

-----------------------
a basic generator has a fixed voltage & a max limit intensity (x amps)
-----------------------
The question did not pertain to generators...yes, most sources of voltage maintain a constant applied voltage...not sure if they all are that way, as we are in the very basics here, and I can possibly forsee variable Difference of Potential needs in future electronics...but that's way off topic.

I had to tell him why a number to the zero power equals one. He even made a direct comment about physics to one of the questions I asked (popped back in my head)...he said he didn't know because he's not versed in the means of physics.
Not quite what I was expecting for $300/week.

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"Edited by siliconjon on 05/21/02 01:36 PM.

Reply to siliconjon

It is easier for most folks to understand voltage then current. Since as you say most regulated power supplies are designed to supply a more or less constant voltage it is easy to relate to this concept. There are circuits that output a constant current but they are more obscure then your everyday constant voltage source.

From <A HREF="http://www.qsl.net/kd2bd/exciter.html" target="_new">http://www.qsl.net/kd2bd/exciter.html</A> "A PNP transistor in the collector circuit functions as a constant current source for the video amplifier. The use of a constant current source rather than a collector load resistor in the video amplifier results in very high voltage gain with nearly rail-to-rail output voltage capability."

Thevenin and Norton equivelent circuits are basically the same concept except that Thevenin circuits are easier to understand because they are voltage related and Norton circuit are harder to understand because they are current based.

Thévenin's Theorem

Any voltage network which may be viewed from two terminals can be replaced by a voltage-source equivalent circuit comprising a single voltage source E and a single series resistance R.. The voltage V is the open-circuit voltage between the two terminals and the resistance Z is the resistance of the network viewed from the terminals with all voltage sources removed from circuit.

Norton's Theorem

Any current network which may be viewed from two terminals can be replaced by a current-source equivalent circuit comprising a single current source I and a single shunt conductance G. The current I is the short-circuit current between the two terminals and the conductance G is the conductance of the network viewed from the terminals with all branches containing current sources are broken off.

My point is that just because you have never heard of or do not understand something does not mean it does not exist.

In high school we learned that there was no such thing as the square root of negitive 4 (nothing times itself will give you -4) and that the quadradic formula gives more then one answer but one is impossable/wrong. Then you go to college and learn that what you learned in high school is not exactly so. The square root of negitive 4 is 2i where i is the square root of negitive 1 (i*i = -1 so 2i*2i = -4) and sometimes you need all the answers that the quadradic formula gives you.

If you have never heard of a constant current source then your opinion does not count.

I'm a double E, and you are?Edited by LAKEDUDE on 05/21/02 06:03 PM.

Reply to lakedude

Ohm's law states that the amount of current passing through a conductor is directly proportional to the voltage across the conductor and inversely proportional to the resistance of the conductor. Ohm's law can be expressed as an equation, V = IR, where V is the difference in volts between two locations (called the potential difference), I is the amount of current in amperes that is flowing between these two points, and R is the resistance in ohms of the conductor between the two locations of interest. V = IR can also be written R = V/I and I = V/R. If any two of the quantities are known, the third can be calculated.

Your Question: "According to Ohm's Law, what is the relationship between Voltage and Resistance"?

Change the applied voltage, resistance does not change. Change resistance, the applied voltage does not change.
Thus it can be determined that voltage and resistance are independant values and have no effect on each other.

I keep coming back to your post to try to understand your mathematical argument. But I get confused because I loose the point of what you are trying to argue. Perhaps it is because I have a fundemental knowledge of the principal of Ohm's law that I cannot separate myself from which impedes my comprehension of your argument.
I admit I had to refresh my memory regarding Ohm's Law because it has been more than a decade since I have studied basic electricity in College.
In the end, Ohm's Law is a simple principal that has been physically and mathematically proven.

Doctor Hooter <A HREF="http://www.page3.com/" target="_new">(·Y·)</A>

Reply to zpyrd

Thanks for the info...but my opinion doesn't count, eh? I think you may have gotten a bit rapped up in your post and forgotten what I had said...nor did I say it didn't exist...did I? But in our class, if it's not in the material that's being covered or will be covered...in a way, it does not exist there...not my decision, though.

My instructor is actually quite good in most of the materials he does cover. I got to appreciate how much worse it could be when a sub came in the other day. Makes our teacher look smarter than Einstein, and a crap load friendlier.

And who are you asking about EE? Me? Do you think I would be EE if I were in an electronics fundamentals class? It would have been nice to test out of a few more classes, which i would have if I were EE. Maybe when I enroll in a programming degree...by then, I should be able to test out of many of those classes as well.

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"

Reply to siliconjon

Yes, but Ohm's law does not state "Applied" in it...nor does it only apply to "Applied Voltage", nor was "Applied" mentioned in the question. If you put the word applied in that question, then yes, my argument would be absurd.

Is there a resistor type out there whose values can be influenced by current or voltage rather than mechanical adjustment? That would close my argument if there were...

Ohh...wait...what about semiconductor material? No...maybe not. That's temperature, which is increased as current increases, which can be increased with a voltage adjustment...Maybe I'll just hold on to this argument until I get a bunch more info crammed into me brain...maybe someone down the road can convince me I'm wrong.

And at least I'm up to 100% in the class! Woohoo! Pardon my excitement, but I enjoy school...especially when it soaks in so quickly. I would still like us to cover more material more quickly...but unfortunately, that will only happen if the teacher gets so behind, we have to make up for lost time...which will be more quickly (briefly), but still not more material in the end.

Well, I do not feel like I have been convinced that Voltage and Resistance, according to Ohm's Law, are unrelated. As the arguments have included only applied voltage, or that crazy man up there talking about stuff my class may not even get to...though, I'm not sure what his argument really was...should probably read it again.

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"

Reply to siliconjon

Your "electronics instructor" is a fool, and the worst kind of fool: a fool that KNOWS that he's [-peep-]*ng with you, not a fool out of ignorance. His argument is all semantics, and reveals his lack of understanding of what he's teaching. While it is true that the voltage is directly related to the current (through R), this is just the linear approximation of the full story. Once you crank the current or voltage high, the relationship is NO LONGER CONSTANT, so all the suddenly, R is NOT A CONSTANT, either.

Taking this back to electro-magnetism (EM), Ohm's law is worded as
vector(J) = conductivity-tensor * vector(E),
where J is the current density; and E is the electric field. (note that conductivity = 1/resistance, so this equation is the same as writing "I=1/R*V" ).

The EM version is "correct", for any value of the applied electric field, in the sense that it is understood that the conductivity will vary when the applied field is strong.

Tell your instructor to go and read Jackson's E&M text-book.

:lol: gnintsakgnirkskir ksron :lol:

Reply to digikid

Your "electronics instructor" is a fool, and the worst kind of fool: a fool that KNOWS that he's [-peep-]*ng with you, not a fool out of ignorance. His argument is all semantics, and reveals his lack of understanding of what he's teaching. While it is true that the voltage is directly related to the current (through R), this is just the linear approximation of the full story. Once you crank the current or voltage high, the relationship is NO LONGER CONSTANT, so all the suddenly, R is NOT A CONSTANT, either.

Taking this back to electro-magnetism (EM), Ohm's law is worded as
vector(J) = conductivity-tensor * vector(E),
where J is the current density; and E is the electric field. (note that conductivity = 1/resistance, so this equation is the same as writing "I=1/R*V" ).

The EM version is "correct", for any value of the applied electric field, in the sense that it is understood that the conductivity will vary when the applied field is strong. Oh, not to forget, usually, the most interesting variable is the frequency of the applied field (you might be doing DC stuff).

Tell your instructor to go and read Jackson's E&M text-book.

:lol: gnintsakgnirkskir ksron :lol:

Reply to digikid

*********************************
And who are you asking about EE? Me? Do you think I would be EE if I were in an electronics fundamentals class? ...
*********************************

Hehee, I thought he was talking about big hootas!!
(Sorry about the double post).

:lol: gnintsakgnirkskir ksron :lol:

Reply to digikid

Sorry I guess I was a little snobby.

The snobby part of my post was not directed at you but at the people insisting that voltage and resistance are not related because when you have a fixed resistance then (of course) the resistance doesn't change with voltage. Ohm's law does not just apply to cases when the resistance is fixed but also when current is fixed and voltage and resistance are allowed to change. It may be a hard concept to grasp but you are exactly correct and your instructor is wrong not only from a math point of view but also from a physics point of view, an engineering point of view and most imporantly from a teaching point of view. You clearly understand both the electronics and the math behind Ohm's law and deserve the test points. If your instructor cannot see this then he is too "wrapped up" in his own ego (like I was).

Sometimes when I answer questions I am not sure of the answer but this is not one of those times. Givin the information provided I am 100% sure that you are correct and your instrucor is wrong.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.

Reply to lakedude

you are an Ass. :smile:

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

Hey...we can say ASS

I'm telling your mom on you

Was I rude? Hard to interpret a disposition in text, eh

While wearing syran-wrap speedos, my shrink had the nerve to tell me "I can cleary see yer nuts!"

Reply to siliconjon

Where was that for?

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

Quote :

With all other variables staying the same, According to Ohm's law they are directly porportional.

There is nothing in Ohm's Law stating that all other variables must stay the same. The formula is used to find the value of any one of the variables based on the other two known variables. There is nothing stated in the Law that says that current must remain constant or that changing V will have an effect on R. If you don't have set values to plug into the equation and you are just using the Ohm's law you can not make a relationship between V and R. Changing V will not change R, but it will change C. Therefore, there is no direct relationship between V and R in Ohm's Law.

If we are supposed to assume that current is a constant then you are correct. I'd like to know who made the determination that the Law is supposed to be looked at that way.

When I was younger, my dad always told me that making assumptions will make an ass out of you one day. You trying to tell me my dad was wrong? :tongue:

Reply to Harisahmed

There are 2 seperate arguements going on at the same time. One is a math arguement. In math if you have a=b*c then when you examine the relationship between 2 variables you pretend the 3rd is fixed. If you do not fix the third variable then you can not determine how two affect one another. As stated before "a" is directly porportional to "b" and "c", while "b" is inversly proportional to "c". Copy and print this paragraph and ask any higher math teacher if you don't believe me.

Since it is possable in real life that what is described by the math would not occur we also have a second electronics arguement about if resistance can change while current stays constant. If in real life ther was no such thing as a variable resistance Ohms law would read E=cI where c is a resistance constant. All resistors are not fixed so Ohm's law reads E=IR where E,I, and R are variables.

In physics E=energy and M=mass and V=velocity. These 3 variables are related by the equation E=MV squared or E=MVV. If we take V to the maximum speed possible (speed of light) the the equation becomes E=Mc squared or E=Mcc. Where "c" is the constant for the speed of light. In both equations E is directly proportional to M. In the first equation E is proportional to the square of V and M is inversly proportional to the square of V. In the second equation c is fixed (like some of you are tring to do with R) so c is not proportional to anything because it is fixed.

In both math and electronics voltage can be directly proportional to resistance. Some of the other people in this thread have made the mistake of assuming that resistance is fixed as in the case of a fixed resistor. In the case of a fixed resistance then of course voltage and resistance are not related and the instructor would be correct. That is not how the question was described.

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.

Reply to lakedude

huh?!? what did you say?

ASS is for an "Application Specific Server" which is a server dedicated to a specific application.

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

:tongue:

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

Oh so ass has two meanings... ASS and ass... well you are not a happy man when you are an ASS... because people will think you are an ass :eek: .

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .Edited by svol on 05/26/02 05:19 PM.

Reply to svol

huh?!?

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

I edited it... do you understand it now?

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

what?!?

Does a Koala [-peep-] in a gum tree and wipe his ass on a Cockatoo?

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy ...

Reply to labdog

Ok I try again.

The lettes ASS have two meanings: ASS (the title/job) ass (your bottombehind).
So if you are an ASS some people can see that title meaning ass (they don't know where ASS stands for) and think you're an ass.

Is this better?

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

Who is on first :tongue:

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

I don't know.
Who is on second?

Doctor Hooter <A HREF="http://www.page3.com/" target="_new">(·Y·)</A>

Reply to zpyrd

No I dont know is on third,What is on second.

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

Then who is on first.

Doctor Hooter <A HREF="http://www.page3.com/" target="_new">(·Y·)</A>

Reply to zpyrd

That's it, who's on first,what is on second.

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

And know is on third.

Doctor Hooter <A HREF="http://www.page3.com/" target="_new">(·Y·)</A>

Reply to zpyrd

I don't know is on third.

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

That is correct.

:lol: You get what you pay for. :lol:

Reply to OldBear

*********************************
In physics E=energy and M=mass and V=velocity. These 3 variables are related by the equation E=MV squared or E=MVV. If we take V to the maximum speed possible (speed of light) the the equation becomes E=Mc squared or E=Mcc.
**********************************

Well, close, but don't mix up the classical expression for kinetic energy of a body in motion (E=1/2*m*v^2) with Einstein's argument for the equivalence of energy and mass (E=m*c^2). The derivations are quite different, and the factor of 1/2 is significant.

:lol: gnintsakgnirkskir ksron :lol:

Reply to digikid

Ok in your equations:

E=1/2*m*v^2
E=m*c^2

Do you agree that in the first equation E is directly related to m and to the square of v, that m is inversely related to the square of v, that in the second E is directly related to m, and in the second c is a constant so it is not related to E or m?

Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.

Reply to lakedude

And who's on base?

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

Naturally !

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

Who's on first base.

My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

Yes, but WhoTF is on home base...

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

lakedude,

well, since we've started this debate...: i agree that "c" is a constant in Einstein's expression for sure, and that E \propto v^2, etc.; as a matter of fact, most theorethical physicists set c to 1 and ignores it all together; thus "E=m" :smile:

however, putting in "c" as the max velocity into "E=1/2*m*v^2" is NOT the correct derivation, as can seen from among other things, the factor of 1/2.

:lol: gnintsakgnirkskir ksron :lol:

Reply to digikid

Today.

<pre>9</pre>My frog asked me for a cigarette...dunno what happened he's all over the place :eek:

Reply to varlo

9?

With a hovering case crashing takes a whole new meaning... :smile: .

Reply to svol

Forum Old Man/Woman's Club : Other - ARGUMENT: Electronic Fundamentals

Please mind

Focus On

ARGUMENT: Electronic Fundamentals

Forum Old Man/Woman's Club : Other - ARGUMENT: Electronic Fundamentals

Please mind