Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Re: Thanks....

JC: ""
Please Jneutron, tell us of the difference between classical drift velocity and the newer quantum mechanical explanation, incorporating Fremi velocity.""

Did you mean Fermi velocity?

John, we discussed this years ago..check the archives.

JC: ""
Also, is nominal valence a proper assumption in calculating resistivity of a particular element? ""

You also asked this question years ago...do you wish me to answer by memory, or would you like me to search the archives?

JC: ""
We can contact Dr. Humel for varification of your answer. I will be referring to: pp. 75-85 'Electronic Properties of Materials' By Rolf E Hummel.""

That would appear to be the exact same set of pages you referred to years ago. But I believe you included the date of publication when you first stated it. In fact, is that the exact same statement you made back then, just copied and pasted??

You made the claim that drift velocity was old school, that the electrons actually moved at Fermi velocity. Begging the question that I asked you over and over and over again, until you finally admitted that you did not have the expertise to answer the question..do you remember the question John??? And, do you remember the answer I gave?..

Don't you remember the derivations, remember the inconsistency between fermi velocity electrons and the vacuum gap in a series circuit??

JC: "" Dr. Hummel offered to correspond with you over these questions, years ago. Did you ever contact him? ""

Funny you should ask that question, John..as, you know full well that I did indeed contact him, because you were copied on all correspondence. Don't you remember that??

Do you not recall that after first contact, I posed a set of questions outlining the question I asked you, and that Dr. Hummell, instead of answering the questions, passed the questions off to a grad student..

And the grad student did not answer the questions, but instead, almost repeated verbatim the lines from the text? And then, I re-asked the questions that were not answered....kkkkkssssssssshhhhhh...

Radio silence...never again were they heard from.

Do you wish to repeat that particular set of responses John??

Or, do you wish to move on to skin effect, where we can basically repeat the sequence of events (you were again copied), but instead of radio silence, have the words "I stand by my paper" be invoked instead of a discussion of the errors in assumptions that are caused by the incorrect use of an approximation equation.

Or, perhaps superconductivity...where I do not need to ask anybody other than the guys who sit at desks in my building.

I pointed out three specific instances where you attempted to defend the work of another, but did not have the ability to discuss fluently, the actual topic beyond a cursory set of sentences.

Those three were used simply because they are the only instances where I can point that out..there may be more, but I am not aware of them.

It does not mean you are stupid, John. Nor ignorant, nor, ugly...:-)

After all, we ALL do it, every day of the week, every week of the year. Think ohms law. How many people can work the derivations out to get from electron collisions (or brehmsstrahlung more precisely) to ohms law? How many can derive the loss of momentum enery to Joules? But yet, we all defend ohms law..

You posited a specific claim, then could not discuss the ramifications. Simple. Easy...not earth shattering.

It says nothing about your abilities as a designer.

Cheers, John



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Signature Sound   [ Signature Sound Lounge ]


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.