There is ALWAYS much to learn,
for everyone, Phds included. And
ESPECIALLY YOU!
Certainly, but there is nothing that you can teach me.
Where is the voltage source
in this example?
Charge.
Take away the
magnetic field, and you are just
moving a wire through space, and
no current will flow.
You simply don't understand. Seriously, I am not trying to insult, I am
telling you that you are truly out of your depth with advanced E&M. You
clearly don't have a degree in an E&M related subject, so what makes you
think that you actually understand E&M? As I stated, all magnetic fields
are due to charge. Period.
A magnetic field is simply charge viewed from a different frame of
reference.
This is obviously beyond your existing knowledge. Special Relativity
tells us how the same object appears in different reference frames.
Applying special relativity to electric fields result in magnetic
fields.
I would agree that E and H fields are
intrinsically related, especially considering
a propagating EM wave, with changing E and H
fields.
This statement tells me immediately tat you simply don't have the
background to understand the relevance of what I am saying. You are
obviously completely ignorant of standard results regarding Relativity
and Maxwell's Equations, to wit, magnetic effects are derivable from
electric effects simply by the application of S.R. This is much deeper
than you are aware of.
But a magnet is NOT the same as a
battery!!
In essence it is. Sure, our measurements of a battery and a magnet are
different, but the reason for this is only because of our relative
motion with respect to the charges that cause the electric field and the
magnetic field.
God, you need to go back to High
School Circuits 101!
No. You need to know when you are are being instructed by those with
more advanced knowledge.
You are clely unacquainted with the true nature, as currently
understood, of Electromagnetism.
External circuitry defines how you
are driving the base.
And your point would be?
Maybe you need to go back to school.
Ho humm...
Ok, so what's the difference between the
function of the FET versus the BJT?
This question is meaningless. FETs and BJTs can both be used for the
same function.
I suggest you stop comparing this
argument to the Theory of Relativity!
Absolute Fucking Rubbish Laddie!
I am not comparing to Special Relativity, I am telling you that special
relativity tells us that that magnetic fields are simply electric fields
when view from a moving reference frame. Maxwell's Equations and Special
Relativity are intimately related.
Its sad, that you simply don't understand that your knowledge is only
that, say, technician level. This is all much more deeper than you can
possible comprehend with your current level of understanding.
The claim that the BJT is current controlled implies that it is the
*motion* of base charge that *causes* the *motion* of charge in the
collector, rather then just the applied voltage itself. Since we can all
agree that the BJT is not magnetically operated, what exact *mechanism*
do you claim for the *motion* of collector charge to be causally related
to base charge *motion*?
The reality is that collector charge motion is not the result of base
charge *motion*, but simply the fact that applying a voltage at the base
emitter causes charge to move from the emitter. It is *not* *motion* of
base charge that instigate the motion of charge from the emitter. Any
charge in the emitter will automatically move when subject to an
electric field. Since motion of base charge is not required to cause
motion of the emitter charge, the transistor cannot be (charge) motion
controlled, i.e. base current controlled.
However... at a *much* deeper level of understanding one might well
indeed claim that it is motion that causes all other motion, but it is
not in the same context of conventional explanations that we are using
here.
Kevin Aylward
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
