Inductance and the acceleration of charge

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Jared Dwarshuis" <jdwarshuis@xxxxxxxxx>


Original poster: Gregory Morris <<mailto:gbmorris@xxxxxxxxx>gbmorris@xxxxxxxxx>

Yes, as I learned in my Electricity and Magnetism course last year,
the electrons are individually moving extremely fast, but in rather
haphazard directions; their actual displacement per time in a
conductor is more on the order of 10^-4 m/s. But nonetheless I can't
help wondering if his proposal has some merit...



Hi: Gregory and Gerry



I used the word "charge" and never referred to electrons. It is 
common knowledge that net electron drift is a rather slow phenomena. 
There are of course many charge carriers all of them discrete, most 
of them (with the exception of bosons) are represented with integers.



I do not know the exact mechanisms by which energy travels from one 
end of the inductor to another,   but they must maintain equations of 
continuity.  Classic description seems to indicate waves traveling at 
C. I see no reason to contradict the classic description, it is very 
much in line with the reasoning of Maxwell who predicted that 
electric and magnetic fields would   advance at C away from a sheet 
of current ( solenoid )



I think that a great deal of confusion abounds concerning the 
velocity of waves down wires. Reading through mountains of literature 
one finds that the velocity of a "brief pulse" is C down a wire. The 
rules change when we talk about forward and reflected waves, in this 
instance the velocity factor will in part, be a function of the 
frequency of the signal. (like aberration in optics)



Some textbooks describe E.M.  velocity soley as a function of LC. But 
this does not jibe with the radio crowd who routinely make wavelength 
antenna with little regard to LC velocity.( indicating that they 
consider an antenna to be a wave guide and not a transmission line.)



I don't like to berate, but the radio crowd seems to be rather 
dismissive about special relativity. Albeit it is easier to tune for 
"maximum smoke"   then to think about the implications. But velocity 
factors do imply time dilation, distance contraction and Doppler 
shift. (enough soap box!)



We take our cues from the optics folks. Many who insist that waves of 
EM always travel at C,. Discrepancies mean that one has not accounted 
for the true path length. In the optics world it is assumed that 
photons re radiate from matter thus giving the impression of a slower 
moving wave.



Thank you for considering these ideas, I would like to give this 
further thought, and apologize for the coarseness of this letter, but 
my daughter and wife are signaling me to get off the computer and 
start being interactive.



 I will post any further analysis as time permits.



Sincerely: Jared Dwarshuis