 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
I corrected some mistyped formulas. Unless you are in an anisotropic medium, indexes x and y are not needed in the definition, as E and H are always orthogonal. LPFR 08:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Move to Intrinsic impedance? (currently redirects to here)
- The IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms (6th ed.) has never heard of electromagnetic impedance.
- I've never heard of it.
- Google has (nearly) never heard of it...
Search term Google hits "intrinsic impedance" 39,500 "electromagnetic impedance" 785
...so I propose swapping Intrinsic impedance and Electromagnetic impedance -- catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Survey
Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
Survey - in support of the move
- Support (see above) -- catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- Gabbec 19:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Survey - in opposition to the move
- OK, I've done it, and without giving much opportunity for comment; but it's only a move/rename and easily reverted in the event of disagreement. -- catslash 21:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The article says Electromagnetic impedance is not to be confused with electrical impedance. This distinction is new to me, and I can't see that E/H is somehow different to V/I. ...Unless it means to say that the intrinsic impedance should not be confused with the resistivity of the medium, which might be considered a valid point. So if it means what it says, then I reckon it needs a citation, and otherwise it needs clarifying -- catslash 10:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
|
| This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
I corrected some mistyped formulas. Unless you are in an anisotropic medium, indexes x and y are not needed in the definition, as E and H are always orthogonal. LPFR 08:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Move to Intrinsic impedance? (currently redirects to here)
- The IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms (6th ed.) has never heard of electromagnetic impedance.
- I've never heard of it.
- Google has (nearly) never heard of it...
Search term Google hits "intrinsic impedance" 39,500 "electromagnetic impedance" 785
...so I propose swapping Intrinsic impedance and Electromagnetic impedance -- catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Survey
Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
Survey - in support of the move
- Support (see above) -- catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- Gabbec 19:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Survey - in opposition to the move
- OK, I've done it, and without giving much opportunity for comment; but it's only a move/rename and easily reverted in the event of disagreement. -- catslash 21:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The article says Electromagnetic impedance is not to be confused with electrical impedance. This distinction is new to me, and I can't see that E/H is somehow different to V/I. ...Unless it means to say that the intrinsic impedance should not be confused with the resistivity of the medium, which might be considered a valid point. So if it means what it says, then I reckon it needs a citation, and otherwise it needs clarifying -- catslash 10:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)