Disputatio:Inductorium

message: .. in campum magneticum imponere potest, cum Fluxio electrica per illud elementum movetur:
1. Why not in + ABL? My understanding is that the magnetic field is the energy, so the energy can be stored in, (more properly, as), the magnetic field.
2. cum fluxio electrica ... movetur: My understanding is that the current creates the magnetic field (and vice-versa when the magnetic field collapses). Doesn't the cum clause only imply that energy is stored in (as) the magnetic field at the same time, with no causality implied or specified, as current moves through the element? Also, why movetur and not movet?
--Autophile 18:17, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hahaha, I came into this disputatio thinking "Alright! Here's a chance to help with grammar" and then like three seconds in I'm like "Science?!?!?!? NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Luckily, Im sure someone around here as a good knowledge of electricity....it just isnt me. ^__^ CeleritasSoni 18:22, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :(1)No that's wrong. THe magnetic field is a separate thing from the energy, although they are closely linked, because the magnetic field can be thought of as storing the energy. The accusative after the in is because the energy is moving into the magnetic field. The above sentence translates to :"...can be stored in the magnetic field, when an electic current moves through that element."

text: :(2)The movetur because the current is moved by a potential difference, it is not its own source of motion.--Rafaelgarcia 18:44, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Movetur here can be a middle, not a passive. The classic model sentence is Luna circa tellurem movetur 'The moon moves around the earth'. IacobusAmor 19:01, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :::I can buy those explanations. Thanks for the clarification. --Autophile 20:22, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about first sentence 

message: The English wiki, presumably reflecting ISO usage, lowercases this term (and all similar terms, e.g. coulombs, joules, webers). Shouldn't it therefore be lowercased here? IacobusAmor 15:07, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Henrici/henrici

message: Why must -ium be added to (the already Latin) inductor? Granted, some machines end in -ium, but inductor 'persuader' must have been borrowed unchanged into English & Spanish (and only phonetically changed into Italian), for a good reason. ¶ This article was created in July, but Vicipaedia hasn't been getting credit for it in the tabulations of the 1000 pages. Nobody added a link to the article in :en:, and none of the bots figured out that an inductorium might be an inductor. Earlier today, I fixed this problem by adding a link to Inductor. IacobusAmor 15:15, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you google inductorium, you'll see its even an alternative english word for inductor."Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) Inductorium \In`duc*to"ri*um\, n.; pl. E. Inductoriums, L. Inductoria. [NL., fr. E. induction.] (Elec.) An induction coil." I think both are correct, just inductorium is more latin sounding for a thing and also fits with condensatrum, resistorium, etc...--Rafaelgarcia 16:19, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ''-ium''