| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"enigma" |
| Date: |
09 Apr 2006 06:04:27 AM |
| Object: |
e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost unless we use a
step-up transformer.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
.
|
|
| User: "Hexenmeister" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
09 Apr 2006 09:04:06 AM |
|
|
"enigma" <enigma@krify.com> wrote in message =
news:1144580667.481468.33320@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=3Dmc^2?
No.
|=20
| what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost unless we use a
| step-up transformer.
No it isn't.
Androcles.
|=20
| also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
|
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Herring" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
10 Apr 2006 10:29:39 AM |
|
|
In message <1144580667.481468.33320@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
enigma <enigma@krify.com> writes
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
No.
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost
Not lost, converted to other forms - heat, in this case.
unless we use a
step-up transformer.
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power available,
because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same proportion,
keeping their product (power) constant.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
_What_ research?
--
Richard Herring
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 11:18:16 AM |
|
|
Richard Herring wrote:
In message <1144580667.481468.33320@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
enigma <enigma@krify.com> writes
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
No.
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost
Not lost, converted to other forms - heat, in this case.
unless we use a
step-up transformer.
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power available,
because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same proportion,
keeping their product (power) constant.
I think it might. If we look at resistive losses in the transmission
line, then using a step-up transformer will greatly reduce resistive
losses in the line and so make more power available at the other end.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
_What_ research?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Herring" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 11:50:13 AM |
|
|
In message <443bd6c9$0$678$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Martin
<usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> writes
Richard Herring wrote:
In message <1144580667.481468.33320@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
enigma <enigma@krify.com> writes
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
No.
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost
Not lost, converted to other forms - heat, in this case.
unless we use a
step-up transformer.
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power
available, because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same
proportion, keeping their product (power) constant.
I think it might. If we look at resistive losses in the transmission
line, then using a step-up transformer will greatly reduce resistive
losses in the line and so make more power available at the other end.
Well, naturally, up to a point. That's why power is generally
distributed at very high voltages.
But the point is that a transformer isn't a device for magically
increasing the available power, as OP appeared to think.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
_What_ research?
--
Richard Herring
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 11:47:52 AM |
|
|
Martin wrote:
Richard Herring wrote:
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power available,
because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same proportion,
keeping their product (power) constant.
I think it might. If we look at resistive losses in the transmission
line, then using a step-up transformer will greatly reduce resistive
losses in the line and so make more power available at the other end.
No, step-up transformers are not going to cause more energy
to be available than the electric company is creating.
- Randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 01:27:04 PM |
|
|
Randy Poe wrote:
Martin wrote:
Richard Herring wrote:
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power available,
because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same proportion,
keeping their product (power) constant.
I think it might. If we look at resistive losses in the transmission
line, then using a step-up transformer will greatly reduce resistive
losses in the line and so make more power available at the other end.
No, step-up transformers are not going to cause more energy
to be available than the electric company is creating.
I didn't say it did (I hope) I said that more power is available (for
the load) IF a step up transformer is used for the transmission than if
it isn't. Only because resistive losses are greatly reduced in the
transmission line.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 02:12:10 PM |
|
|
Martin wrote:
Randy Poe wrote:
Martin wrote:
Richard Herring wrote:
Stepping the voltage up (or down) doesn't affect the power available,
because the current is stepped down (or up) in the same proportion,
keeping their product (power) constant.
I think it might. If we look at resistive losses in the transmission
line, then using a step-up transformer will greatly reduce resistive
losses in the line and so make more power available at the other end.
No, step-up transformers are not going to cause more energy
to be available than the electric company is creating.
I didn't say it did (I hope) I said that more power is available (for
the load) IF a step up transformer is used for the transmission than if
it isn't. Only because resistive losses are greatly reduced in the
transmission line.
Oh well, then I agree of course. That is the crux of why
Westinghouse won and Edison lost in the AC vs. DC
battles of the early 20th century. An interesting story that
I'd never heard as part of the Edison legend until quite late
in life.
- Randy
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
09 Apr 2006 10:28:04 AM |
|
|
enigma wrote:
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
No, the only thing superconductivity proves is that
it costs more to do a superconductiivty experiment
than it does to walk on the moon.
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost unless we use a
step-up transformer.
No all energy produced on power lines is actually
just a US Air Force line item in the 2010
Chinese Congress budget.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ABarlow" |
|
| Title: Re: e=mc^2 disproved by superconductivity? |
11 Apr 2006 12:35:36 AM |
|
|
enigma wrote:
hi, does superconductivity disprove einstein's eqn e=mc^2?
No, the two have nothing to do with each other, really. I don't think
you can really "disprove" an equation, anyway, so long as it works in a
particular case. Then the best you can do is show that it is show it is
either a specific case of something more general, or an approximation
for a better equation. But actually disprove an equation? I don't think
you can.
what i mean is energy produced on a power line is lost unless we use a
step-up transformer.
That is irrelavent to E=mc^2.
also was such research being prooved by the virginia university?
Research on transformers? Superconductors? Maybe. I don't know. You
can't prove research, either, by the way, except, I guess to prove that
the methodology of the experiment is unsound.
A.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
