"Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:bv9dkj$ecs$8@titan.btinternet.com...
>
> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote in message
> news:4017b337$1@epflnews.epfl.ch...
>
> [snip]
>
> > This paper I have not read, sorry. The other one, you have not reacted
any
> > time about the scaling problem as you gave me the impression that
magnetic
> > induction current is proportional to wire length instead of enclosed
> surface
> > (~ L^2), while both engineering success and dimensional analysis show
that
> > it must be a L^2 law.
>
> In CGS EMU, self inductance has the units of  L
>

This was about a remark to Sergey from last year's discussion "dynamic
magnetic field is open" about the induction current which according to
Faraday is proportional to magnetic flux change from u ~d(B.A)/dt.
The idea that it is proportional to wire length can not be right, which is
what I understood from Sergey's comments that the action of B on the wire
(with length L) is what matters instead of the enclosed flux (with area
~L^2).

Harald