Harvey Norris writes, > Here are the individual voltage rises on each phase.. > Phase 1- 372 volts > Phase 2- 388 volts > Phase 3- 188 volts > The highest possible voltage difference between phases > 1 and 2 would be 372 + 388 = 760 volts > The actual interphasal difference is 722 volts, which > is 95% of the possible highest voltage difference, > also meaning the phase angle is almost 180 degrees. > > The highest possible voltage difference between phases > 2 and 3 would be 388 + 188 = 576 volts > The actual interphasal voltage difference is 381 > volts, 66% of the highest possible reading > > The highest possible voltage difference between phases > 3 and 1 would be 188 + 372 = 560 volts > The actual interphasal difference between these phases > is 561 volts! This of course is 100 % of the possible > voltage differences between those phases. > > What this then implies is that since we have two phase > angles at and near 180 degrees phasing differences, > there should hardly be ANY phase angle difference > between phases 2 and 3!
You raise an interesting point between the interconnection of geometry with emf. The sine wave itself has a definite 2 dimensional quality, even when operating in a 3-D world. Anything which can be polarized, such as light photons, always have definite 2-D qualities, of course. With AC emf flowing in conductive wires, the picture is a bit more muddled because the wire, which is a 3-D cylinder (usually) is accommodating an emf wave-form which "wants" to be 2-D. What usually happens, then, is that the 2-D wave is in effect folding itself around the surface of the wire. IMHO this surface folding tendency, which is accomplished in order to maintain a 2-D wave-form - which form cannot be maintained predictably within the core of the cylinder, is so fundamental that it has extenuating implications... and as a secondary observation... this surface folding tendency may be part of the reason why we even have a "skin effect" in AC conductivity. In your case the phasing "wants" to be at angles of 120 degrees, but you have prohibited that somehow, with unpredictable effects. One is led to speculate, is there any way to "capitalize" on this quirk of emf - i.e. it's desire to maintain *balanced* two dimensionality? Excuse the anthropomorphism. Its just the quirky way that some warped brains think about nature. We can probably not capitalize (achieve net OU) on that dimensional inter-connectivity tendency (geometry and emf) without RTSC because of persistent resistive losses, but when room temperature superconductive wires are readily available, one wonders what will happen when inventors like Harvey start playing around with such things as sequentially and drastically changing the topography of current flow within an extended aether... which cannot help but get involved? By that it is meant that, when one is dealing with AC, does the point ever come in the overlapping phase parameters where 2-D emf plus 1-D time has created so many multi-jointed QM probability options that an "extra" time dimension, t2, must be cohered in order to accommodate the increasing wave-probability dynamics? That might be the way that Saviour would describe a hypothetical way to achieve OU... ...or not ;-) Jones
