Recent content by Omegatron

Because it's completely wrong. The natural circle constant is circumference / radius, not circumference / diameter. If aliens are transmitting on an "obvious" frequency, it's tau * hydrogen, not pi * hydrogen. http://tauday.com/tau-manifesto

Ok, I worked through it and confirmed that the AC gain is approximately 1+R4/R5 (assuming beta much larger than 1) and is not affected by R3. Previously I was trying to figure it out for this circuit which has more resistors.

It's 2 common-emitter stages in series, but with negative feedback from output to input. This says the gain is 1+(R4/R5). I don't think that's correct? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sziklai_pair would require R4 = 0 and R3 = infinity, no?

Right, but the energy is not flowing from the source to the load inside the conductors. When the Poynting vector points toward the resistive conductor, the energy is flowing from the source into the conductor itself. It is then dissipated. The resistance of the conductors is converting that...

I'm not sure what you're talking about. This is about the energy in DC circuits flowing in the fields surrounding the wires. The energy is traveling entirely outside the conductors. This is only for twin lead connections, though. For coax, the energy flow is contained entirely in the...

The whole point of the original linked article is that wires do not confine the energy flow. Even in a DC circuit, the energy is entirely in the fields. Do you disagree with the article?

Actually that makes sense. As the slope of the function increases, the likelihood of getting a point at that value increases, so it would seem that the PDF of a function is the derivative of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_function" to figure it out, like using only a single cycle of...

Could you show the derivation? Hmmm... From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiation_of_trigonometric_functions#Differentiating_the_inverse_sine_function": \frac{d}{dx} \arcsin x & {}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-x^2}}\\

Nevermind. I don't even know why I bother coming to this forum. Not only do I immediately get shot down every time I post anything speculative (without actually reading what I've written or thinking about it or being the least bit imaginative), I get attitude about it, too.

Why? .

I'm talking about the simple, idealized model of a transformer that engineers use; not a real transformer: Vs/Ns = Vp/Np There is no stipulation that it must be AC. Please don't just say "transformers can't pass DC" without thinking about it. I'm very well aware that real...

I'm well aware that real transformers can't pass DC, but the ideal transformer — the mathematical model that engineers use — can. I'm wondering what property of real transformers prevents them from passing low frequencies well. Also wondering if it would be possible with exotic materials...

I only recently realized that ideal transformers can pass DC. Of course real ones can't. What's the difference? What is non-ideal about real transformers that prevents them from passing DC? Is it the fact that the flux is not linked perfectly between the two coils? Is it because the...

I will. Yep. Definitely a possibility. That's what I was thinking. Well, there's the standard frequency compensation cap in the feedback loop, limiting it to a 3 dB point around 30 kHz probably. The signal I'm seeing is in the audio range, though, and the same as the previous...

Just traces going an inch or so. That wouldn't work here; they're on the same board pretty close to each other. I didn't actually check it, but I was assuming it was fine, especially because there are two channels on the same dual op-amp and they have different output levels.