3 ms·
A specific analogy doesn't have to be used forever. You can drop it when it starts being problematic. Asked a different way, what didn't work for the purposes
by mynameisvlad 4y ago
A specific analogy doesn't have to be used forever. You can drop it when it starts being problematic.
Asked a different way, what didn't work for the purposes of this article? It's at a high enough level that "becomes an impediment" isn't really an issue. Nor are "p-n silicon junctions". Nor the speed of transmission.
- cptcobalt 4y agoThat's the concern being raised. It's indeed problematic to use a water bucket/pipe analogy in an AC grid when talking about transmission and generation of power, and related things like spinning reserves. (It's less problematic when discussing energy.)
- chestertn 4y agoThe water analogy is perfectly fine to use to talk about the bulk AC transmission grid (which is low-frequency alternating current). photochemsyn speaks about how the hydraulic phenomena is not adequate to describe some electronic aspects (e.g., modeling p-n silicon junctions). These issues are irrelevant to how well the hydraulic analogy works to describe the workings of the AC transmission grid.
- mynameisvlad 4y agoYep, exactly my point. For the purposes of this explanation in the article the analogy works fine, hence why I'm asking what exactly didn't work. That it doesn't work in all possible cases talking about A/C transmission doesn't really impact its use as an analogy in a high-level view of the grid.