Re: LF: Ohm's law revision (II)

To:	[email protected]
Subject:	Re: LF: Ohm's law revision (II)
From:	"Alberto di Bene" <[email protected]>
Date:	Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:00:25 +0200
References:	<002a01c30909$cc0f0d40$fe02a8c0@base>
Reply-to:	[email protected]
Sender:	<[email protected]>
User-agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02

More on phasing religion - the attachment is the PSpice version of the circuit Adam used to argue that the voltage across the inductor shifted 45 degrees in this circuit - and that is a true statement. He also said the current and the voltage across the output resistance was in phase. That is not a true statement. If any of you run the PSpice model attached you will see that the current thru the load resistor and the voltage across the resistor are not in phase. I leave it to you to post your results on this forum.

Ted &Georg

Yes, I stand by my idea, it must have been a new type of grass....
This is the result of my simulation with Pspice of their circuit.
What do you judge the phase difference between voltage and current is ?

73 Alberto I2PHD

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
LF: Ohm's law revision (II), ipsia Re: LF: Ohm's law revision (II), Alberto di Bene <=

Previous by Date:	Re: LF: Re: Important sperimantal revision of ohm's law, Laurence J Howell
Next by Date:	Re: LF: Important sperimantal revision of ohm's law, Rik Strobbe
Previous by Thread:	LF: Ohm's law revision (II), ipsia
Next by Thread:	Re: LF: Re: Important sperimantal revision of ohm's law, Laurence J Howell
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]