🚀 go-pugleaf

vktamhane12@rediffmail.com (V.K.Tamhane) wrote in message news:<9d62a326.0407170443.5990dad7@posting.google.com>...
> selftrans@yandex.ru (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<a42650fc.0407161931.376c92f0@posting.google.com>...
> > "Spaceman" <Spaceman@realspaceman.com> wrote in message news:<VLZIc.65325$JR4.14174@attbi_s54>...
> > > >time-variable
> > > 
> > > <LOL>
> > > like rubber rulers would make
> > > length variables for the same object!
> > > <LOL>
> > > 
> > > Too funny!
> > > Time variable!
> > > <ROFLOL>
> > > You forgot what time was "invented for" huh?
> > > Tis very sad that physics loses so much when
> > > even the measurement standards are now "variables"
> > > 
> > > Next,
> > > You will find out the inch has more than one length I suppose!
> > > :)
> > 
> > Are not you tired to snip words from context? Maybe, it would be
> > better to understand the meaning of written? ;-)
> > 
> > Sergey
> 
>    Sergey, no body has understood the meaning. I doubt if anybody had
> read it carefully.
>    You are right and you have proved it. The common assumption that
> time dependent flux is always the cause of the emf is wrong. The
> concept of flux linkages and change in it during motion is wrong. We
> get equivalence only if the flux is homogeneous. You have proved that
> it is not the same thing if the flux changes with distance. Your
> equation 10 cannot be faulted. Derivation is correct.
>    There is a minor slip before the statement of eq.10. Instead of
> db*h you have written dh*b. Please correct it.


Dear Mr Tamhane,

Thank you so much for your warm words. The colleagues able to
objective and constructive criticism and comprehension not often
participate in discussions. So it is especially pleasant to hear exact
and professional criticism. As to the problem in our theoretical part,
I fully agree with you. And this is not a slip, the problem is deeper
and connected with my mistake. This mistake does not touch the
experimental part of paper, but in theoretical part, because of aspect
which you pointed, this all appears much more interesting. We just are
working on it. Surely, even you did not fully grasp the consequences.
;-) This is why I will not substitute this page straight now, but in 7
or 10 days will ask you to review it.

Thank you again that you pointed me to this aspect.

Respectfully,

Sergey