Printable View
Scientists began to realize that space is filled with invisible regions of energy that exist, unlike gravity, independently of material objects. These fields are what we now call electromagnetic fields, or EMFs.
Anytime I've ever heard the term, it was in regards to electromagnetic fields. I never knew its original intent was for electromotive force. Very good, IronP. I minored in Physics and never knew that one...
I don't think there is any 'official' meaning for the acronymn, it's just convenient shorthand.
Does the IEEE have any set policy on these things?
-_- I wouldn't take that site to seirously. They have a pendant for sale that protects your body from EMFs.Quote:
Originally Posted by NightWolve
http://www.promolife.com/products/subtle.htm
A site trying to make money off people's fear is not what I would call a good refrence.
They should have taught you about electromotive forces the same day they brought up Ben Franklin. We now mesure EMFs in volts.
I dont think the IEEE or anyone else decides on what acronyms will mean. I imagine that people who work in fields that use these acronyms can understand whats going on based on context.Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
Well as for the conversation at hand it does matter. If Omni wants to be a better EE than me, he should be able to talk the talk.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Oh, I'm not. The site was random. I can google and find any number of them using/defining it the same way. My point was that's usually how I've seen EMF used for as long as I can remember. If my teacher used it, I probably took it that way too. Never once saw it defined as electromotive force anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
Oh yeah, defenitley. Anyone ever been under their dash or in their floorboards to do an alarm or car stereo install? 50 plus wires in a cluster, and all have to be color coded diff. The lesson here? Read your wiring diagrams.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
Good lord, this is some ridiculous shit right here.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/e1/electrom-f.aspQuote:
Originally Posted by NightWolve
http://www.phys.ualberta.ca/~gingric...tes/node8.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...tiveForce.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromotive_force
http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~cch.../c123/emf.html
http://www.micromo.com/library/docs/...ve%20Force.pdf
To be fair, your teacher probably didn't use the word a lot because it's an old fashion word for voltage.
Better get off the computer. The EMFs might get you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mykozo
If you aren't happy, stuff won't necessarily make you happy, and it probably won't keep you happy.
If you are already happy, have a good life, a good family etc. etc., having stuff is the icing on the cake.
And no, money only matters when you don't have it, but when you do, it is still nice to have.
Um, yeah, I believe you... I dunno why you're arguing with me when I told you that you were correct in the first post. All that's needed is a dictionary. You're under the impression that I was somehow trying to disprove you or something by me sourcing something/anything as to how I've usually seen the term used (This credible enough? Not like there was a lack of credible sites.). That was intended to explain my surprise that going by the textbook dictionary definition, they've been essentially all wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
I just never knew there was a popular misconception (which is why you posed the question in the first place - it's not coming from just weird sites) involving its meaning/usage, so I never would've thought to have looked it up combined with the fact that I never saw it used in a context to lead me to believe they meant volts/voltage.That would be why then, yeah. Either 'potential difference' or volts/voltage was used.Quote:
To be fair, your teacher probably didn't use the word a lot because it's an old fashion word for voltage.