selftrans@yandex.ru (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<a42650fc.0408080626.27047097@posting.google.com>...
> vktamhane12@rediffmail.com (V.K.Tamhane) wrote in message news:<9d62a326.0407170443.5990dad7@posting.google.com>...
> > selftrans@yandex.ru (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<a42650fc.0407161931.376c92f0@posting.google.com>...
> > > "Spaceman" <Spaceman@realspaceman.com> wrote in message news:<VLZIc.65325$JR4.14174@attbi_s54>...
> > > > >time-variable
> > > > 
> > > > <LOL>
> > > > like rubber rulers would make
> > > > length variables for the same object!
> > > > <LOL>
> > > > 
> > > > Too funny!
> > > > Time variable!
> > > > <ROFLOL>
> > > > You forgot what time was "invented for" huh?
> > > > Tis very sad that physics loses so much when
> > > > even the measurement standards are now "variables"
> > > > 
> > > > Next,
> > > > You will find out the inch has more than one length I suppose!
> > > > :)
> > > 
> > > Are not you tired to snip words from context? Maybe, it would be
> > > better to understand the meaning of written? ;-)
> > > 
> > > Sergey
> > 
> >    Sergey, no body has understood the meaning. I doubt if anybody had
> > read it carefully.
> >    You are right and you have proved it. The common assumption that
> > time dependent flux is always the cause of the emf is wrong. The
> > concept of flux linkages and change in it during motion is wrong. We
> > get equivalence only if the flux is homogeneous. You have proved that
> > it is not the same thing if the flux changes with distance. Your
> > equation 10 cannot be faulted. Derivation is correct.
> >    There is a minor slip before the statement of eq.10. Instead of
> > db*h you have written dh*b. Please correct it.
> 
> And?... ;-)
> 
> Sergey

     Sorry for the delay in replying- on account of my pre-occupation.
Mathematics is now correct and it is a good example, which shows that
difference in the motional and induced emf cannot be separated
mathematically, even if non-homogeneous magnetic fields are
considered. Your further arguments are of course correct and it is a
good paper.
     May I draw the conclusion? Mathematics is just a tool for
calculations and excellent at that but physical phenomenon is
independent of any formula. It is for this reason that the concepts
and mechanisms are important in physics. Not to calculate results but
to actually understand the physics itself.
     You have taken great efforts to prove the basic and fundamental
mechanisms and certainly differentiated between the two actions
responsible for the magnetic field based electromotive force.