Talk:Intrinsic impedance

some mistyped formulas

I corrected some mistyped formulas. Unless you are in an anisotropic medium, indexes x and y are not needed in the definition, as E and H are always orthogonal. LPFR 08:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Intrinsic impedance? (currently redirects to here)

The IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms (6th ed.) has never heard of electromagnetic impedance.

I've never heard of it.

Google has (nearly) never heard of it...

Search term	Google hits
"intrinsic impedance"	39,500
"electromagnetic impedance"	785

...so I propose swapping Intrinsic impedance and Electromagnetic impedance --catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

Support (see above) --catslash 10:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. --Gabbec 19:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - in opposition to the move

OK, I've done it, and without giving much opportunity for comment; but it's only a move/rename and easily reverted in the event of disagreement. --catslash 21:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Distinction between electromagnetic and electrical impedance

The article says Electromagnetic impedance is not to be confused with electrical impedance. This distinction is new to me, and I can't see that E/H is somehow different to V/I. ...Unless it means to say that the intrinsic impedance should not be confused with the resistivity of the medium, which might be considered a valid point. So if it means what it says, then I reckon it needs a citation, and otherwise it needs clarifying --catslash 10:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]