Norton's law - elmers Forum at eHam.net

$\'\'$

$\'\'$

$\'\'$

eHam.net Forum : elmers : Norton's law

Forum Help

1-10 of 17 messages

Page 1 of 2 Next

Norton's law	Reply
by K2OOG on November 5, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
Are Norton's law and Thevenin's Theorem duality equivalent?

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by WB2WIK on November 5, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
Nah, Norton was Jackie Gleason's pal and his law was, "Never leave the sewers unless there's a good reason," while Thevenin was all hung up on the voltage drops of all stuff in a circuit has to add up to the applied voltage. Two different things.

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by K5END on November 5, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
First, define "duality equivalent." But based on the premise of your question, I suspect you know the answer already, or at least you know the relationship between the Norton equivalent and Thevenin equivalent circuits. First semester in EE class? How's the mid term going? Go back to studying, stay off the dang internet and quit asking philosophical questions. You'll thank me later for this advice.

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by KB4QAA on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
I thought Nortons Law was "Wash your hands before going to the bathroom". Or was it "Don't eat a sandwich if you drop it"? hmmm.

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by WA7IRY on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
I seem to recall that Norton also said (presumably after a hard day in the sewer), "All that glitters is not gold!..."

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by N2EY on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
Thevenin says you can simplify a complex linear timeinvariant circuit into a single voltage source in series with a single impedance. Norton says you can simplify a complex linear timeinvariant circuit into a single current source in parallel with a single impedance. Together they're a pretty good demonstration of the concept of duality. 73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: Norton's law	Reply
by W8JI on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
They are similar if you do not take them literally to the point where you use them to define what happens INSIDE the black box called the source. For example they cannot describe what happens so far as source dissipation or energy conversion efficiency with most sources. They generally only describe what happens outside the source as load impedance is varied, and almost always then only for very small changes in load impedance. The big downfall of people is when they break the rules or expand the rules to make them mean more than the original boundaries or limitations. Tom

Strictly speaking...	Reply
by N2EY on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits, not laws. 73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: Strictly speaking...	Reply
by N3OX on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
I don't know what you're asking here... Norton's law says that young women in yellow coats walking in the rain will leave a high concentration of sodium chloride effluent as they pass. Thevenin's theorem is that only about 0.00003% of the world's population can make a pair of beating RF oscillators with sensitive tuning by external antennas do anything other than make spooky "woo" sounds. I don't think those could be more different, and certainly have little to do with duality. Oh... hang on... I thought you said Morton's law and Theremin's theorem. My bad.

RE: Strictly speaking...	Reply
by K0BG on November 6, 2009	Mail this to a friend!
Dan? Did you lay awake all night? Alan, KØBG www.k0bg.com PS: And I thought Steve was nocturnal. Whoa!

Page 1 of 2 Next

Next Topic: Thevenin and Norton are equivalent circuits
Previous Topic: Yaesu FT 897 Tuning

Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.

Check our help page for help using Forum, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the Forum Manager.

$\'\'$