In Reply to: Wrong Tree, Wrong Forrest, and the AH articles is _still_ about DF, not DA posted by Jon Risch on May 5, 2004 at 20:40:17:
JR, after JN's scathing and unfair attack on you, based on higher authority, I downloaded and am reading through a few of the topic that you posted on your website.
I found that the inductance one of the easiest and best explanations of inductance that I have ever read. I have been so bogged down in formulas and exceptions to the rule, regarding inductance, that I almost forgot the forest while examining the trees. ;-) I know that there is even more to 'total inductance' than you wrote, but your general readers won't have the math background or even interest to go beyond what you wrote.
IF JN wants to discuss the subtleties of 'internal inductance' or changes in 'skin effect' at near absolute zero temperature away from the standard formula, so be it.
For reference: refer to Kittel 'Quantum Theory of Solids' Wiley 1963 pp 308-319.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Wrong Tree, Wrong Forrest, and the AH articles is _still_ about DF, not DA - john curl 15:18:06 05/06/04 (1)
- Re: Wrong Tree, Wrong Forrest, and the AH articles is _still_ about DF, not DA - jneutron 05:46:14 05/07/04 (0)