On Wed, July 27, 2016 10:33 am, Chris Caudle wrote: > Does that imply that this value is not constant: >>> And if you take the classic definition >>> Q = 2 pi * total energy /energy lost per cycle >>> then it would seem earth has a Q factor.
After re-reading "The Story of Q" I agree that Q of a rotating body could be non-constant, but also consistent with the original definition of Q as the ratio of reactance to resistance of an inductor, which of course would vary almost completely linearly over a wide frequency range where the resistive dissipation was not frequency dependent (i.e. where skin effect was negligible). Perhaps a more useful question is whether that is still a useful definition compared to how the term is more typically used now to refer to resonance bandwidth. -- Chris Caudle _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
