Nothing is being hidden away! The 20 quantities you mention are not independent, and by a bit of manipulation one can set up the description in terms of a set of equations which contain the same information but not redundantly.
John Ragle -- W1ZI ===== On 3/6/2011 5:56 PM, Alexey Kats wrote: > "how do you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations?" > > It's called generalization. Compare it with Newton's law for gravity - even > though the size, shape, and movement of objects does play its role the law > is not concerned with them and still adequately describes the effect of > gravity. (Let's not start comparison between Newton's law and general > relativity.) > > So, too many unknowns are needed when one wants to calculate the precise > effect of something. But they might not be important when one wants to > express the relationship between effects, so why not to hide them where they > are not needed until the moment comes? > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Kevin Rock<kev...@coho.net> wrote: > >> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations in >> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used >> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he >> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how do >> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What >> has been lost in the translation? >> Kevin. KD5ONS >> ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
