[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Actually serious, and for the record, a fluid analogy is quite accurate
> for macroscopic eletrical current. It just has to be envisioned within a
> roughly two-dimensional universe.
Roughly 2-dimensional? Would that be, like, 1.9 or 2.1 dimensions? Is
that like 5.1 surround sound, but for dimensions?
That's not a helpful analogy. For an analogy to work, it must relate to
something someone knows or has seen. I have never seen fluid flowing in a
2-dimensional universe. I live in a 4-dimensional (x,y,z,t) universe (or
5, if you count gravity as a dimension). Einstein and others have lots of
theories about 10 or more dimensions, but my mind doesn't contemplate that
stuff.
Ohm's law (E = IR) and most of the equations we use daily are actually
macroscopic expressions. Only when you get down to extremely small
currents (i.e. bias currents of some FET op-amps) does it become a
probabilistic expression.
Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website: www.bagotronix.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually serious, and for the record, a fluid analogy is quite accurate
for macroscopic eletrical current. It just has to be envisioned within a
roughly two-dimensional universe.
____________________________________________________________
You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum
To Post messages:
mailto:[email protected]
Unsubscribe and Other Options:
http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com
Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004):
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current):
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
