![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Removed from the article:
What's the special case that prevents this from being a perpetual motion machine?
o | Z | o--V^V^---*---V^V^V---*---V^V^V^---o | Z | o
- Omegatron 20:59, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
o | | o--V^V^---*---V^V^V---*---V^V^V^---o | | o
It might not be exactly the same as the Chung circuit, but I'm guessing based on Heron's comments. Madhu 14:33, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
And here's some images from the paper:
I propose removing this content as it is recent research, not relevant, not proven, and probably incorrect or at least misleading. Comments?-- Light current 14:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Shouldnt this effect be called negative transresistance any way as the experimental device is simple 2 port network? 8-?-- Light current 14:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
No, sorry I havent been following the argument. Im presenting a fresh, unsullied view. By your latter comments 'O', it seems to me that you are voting for deletion of this material also. Am I correct? If the material is to remain on WP, its proper place is on the transconductance page. Yes? Also when you say its not an 'active' device, in what way would you say it differs from one? -- Light current 18:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Well OK 'O' but nevertheless I think this stuff does not really belong on this page. The furore over this wild claim has surely died down now and we should present a stable, long term view on science & engineering subjects. Should we not?-- Light current 20:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree it doesnt deserve its own article. As I said before, since its a transresistance phenomenon it should go in the transconductance article. A link to the transconductance page should be put at the bottom of the negative resistance page-- Light current 15:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
You say 'No one ever calls it a transconductance or transresistance.' but negative transresistance is exacatly what she describes as measuring. Its a 2 port network!-- Light current 18:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Light current 18:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
It seems that most of this article is about negative differential resistance, but the Negative resistance circuits section is about actual negative resistances (with a source inside them). Should we split into two articles? Move this article to Negative differential resistance? - Omegatron 23:52, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
"Many circuit topologies are capable of producing negative resistance."
While debunking the Chung experiment, I noticed another bad science reference to Kron and his negative resistors, so I had to fix that as well. It's obvious from this paper of his that he was talking about perfectly conventional circuits. -- Heron 21:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Whoever made up this page is a @#*^&, stop confusing people if you are not sure! I am tired of marking students' books full of crap.
Negative resistance is an amplifier, it is the working principle of a laser for example. Any amplifier of any form can be consider as negative resistor.
Notice the two references, one is apparent negative resistance, while another is negative differential resistance, i.e. NOT negative resistance.
Negative differential resistance is common in non-linear systems. In electronic it is describe as non-ohmic device. In the case of Neon lamp (where i found this page), it is a run away positive feedback effect.
The term "Negative resistance" should ONLY be use to describe amplifier (i.e. the circuit part of this page). Where the rest of the page should go under the title of "Negative differential resistance"
To "137.205.164.190:"
My longstanding impression is that "negative resistance" is a very commonly used term for negative differential resistance. I appreciate the point you're trying to make ("negative resistance" = through the origin, "negative differential resistance" = negative slope somewhere not passing through the origin).
However, the issue here is one of word usage. If you're sure that "negative resistance" isn't, hasn't, and shouldn't be used to cover both concepts, would you cite a reliable source for that—say, an electronics dictionary or recent textbook? I, for one, am not ready to update the article just on the say-so of someone who has not even created an account. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm....
http://www.hobbyprojects.com/dictionary/n.html ... "negative resistance: A resistance such that when the current through it increases the voltage drop across the resistance decreases."
Secrets of RF Circuit Design: "The negative resistance phenomena, also called negative differential resistance..."
Practical Rf Circuit Design for Modern Wireless Systems: Active Circuits and Systems by Rowan Gilmore, Les Besser - Technology - 2003: "Negative resistance refers to a component or a circuit where an incremental increase of the applied voltage leads to a decrease of current..."
Basic Electronics by Bureau Of Naval Person U S Navy - Technology - 1973 "negative resistance of the tunnel diode..."
I think you are wrong, or overly prescriptive. "Negative resistance" is, in fact, the common term, and "negative differential resistance" is an alternative term that can also be used that some people prefer as being clearer. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Removed from the article:
What's the special case that prevents this from being a perpetual motion machine?
o | Z | o--V^V^---*---V^V^V---*---V^V^V^---o | Z | o
- Omegatron 20:59, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
o | | o--V^V^---*---V^V^V---*---V^V^V^---o | | o
It might not be exactly the same as the Chung circuit, but I'm guessing based on Heron's comments. Madhu 14:33, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
And here's some images from the paper:
I propose removing this content as it is recent research, not relevant, not proven, and probably incorrect or at least misleading. Comments?-- Light current 14:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Shouldnt this effect be called negative transresistance any way as the experimental device is simple 2 port network? 8-?-- Light current 14:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
No, sorry I havent been following the argument. Im presenting a fresh, unsullied view. By your latter comments 'O', it seems to me that you are voting for deletion of this material also. Am I correct? If the material is to remain on WP, its proper place is on the transconductance page. Yes? Also when you say its not an 'active' device, in what way would you say it differs from one? -- Light current 18:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Well OK 'O' but nevertheless I think this stuff does not really belong on this page. The furore over this wild claim has surely died down now and we should present a stable, long term view on science & engineering subjects. Should we not?-- Light current 20:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree it doesnt deserve its own article. As I said before, since its a transresistance phenomenon it should go in the transconductance article. A link to the transconductance page should be put at the bottom of the negative resistance page-- Light current 15:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
You say 'No one ever calls it a transconductance or transresistance.' but negative transresistance is exacatly what she describes as measuring. Its a 2 port network!-- Light current 18:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Light current 18:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
It seems that most of this article is about negative differential resistance, but the Negative resistance circuits section is about actual negative resistances (with a source inside them). Should we split into two articles? Move this article to Negative differential resistance? - Omegatron 23:52, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
"Many circuit topologies are capable of producing negative resistance."
While debunking the Chung experiment, I noticed another bad science reference to Kron and his negative resistors, so I had to fix that as well. It's obvious from this paper of his that he was talking about perfectly conventional circuits. -- Heron 21:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Whoever made up this page is a @#*^&, stop confusing people if you are not sure! I am tired of marking students' books full of crap.
Negative resistance is an amplifier, it is the working principle of a laser for example. Any amplifier of any form can be consider as negative resistor.
Notice the two references, one is apparent negative resistance, while another is negative differential resistance, i.e. NOT negative resistance.
Negative differential resistance is common in non-linear systems. In electronic it is describe as non-ohmic device. In the case of Neon lamp (where i found this page), it is a run away positive feedback effect.
The term "Negative resistance" should ONLY be use to describe amplifier (i.e. the circuit part of this page). Where the rest of the page should go under the title of "Negative differential resistance"
To "137.205.164.190:"
My longstanding impression is that "negative resistance" is a very commonly used term for negative differential resistance. I appreciate the point you're trying to make ("negative resistance" = through the origin, "negative differential resistance" = negative slope somewhere not passing through the origin).
However, the issue here is one of word usage. If you're sure that "negative resistance" isn't, hasn't, and shouldn't be used to cover both concepts, would you cite a reliable source for that—say, an electronics dictionary or recent textbook? I, for one, am not ready to update the article just on the say-so of someone who has not even created an account. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm....
http://www.hobbyprojects.com/dictionary/n.html ... "negative resistance: A resistance such that when the current through it increases the voltage drop across the resistance decreases."
Secrets of RF Circuit Design: "The negative resistance phenomena, also called negative differential resistance..."
Practical Rf Circuit Design for Modern Wireless Systems: Active Circuits and Systems by Rowan Gilmore, Les Besser - Technology - 2003: "Negative resistance refers to a component or a circuit where an incremental increase of the applied voltage leads to a decrease of current..."
Basic Electronics by Bureau Of Naval Person U S Navy - Technology - 1973 "negative resistance of the tunnel diode..."
I think you are wrong, or overly prescriptive. "Negative resistance" is, in fact, the common term, and "negative differential resistance" is an alternative term that can also be used that some people prefer as being clearer. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |