Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1038/s41598-018-29394-7 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1038/s41598-018-29394-7 C6054652!6054652!30030498     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Sci+Rep 2018 ; 8 (ä): ä Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=30030498|t=2018. The case for rejecting the memristor as a fundamental circuit element |pdf=|usr=}}{{30030498}} gab.com Text The case for rejecting the memristor as a fundamental circuit element JO: Sci Rep http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=30030498 #FOAvip The memory resistor with the moniker memristor was a harmless postulate in 1971. Since 2008 a device that claims to be the memristor is on the prowl, seeking recognition as a fundamental circuit element, sometimes wanting electronics textbooks to be rewritten, always promising remarkable digital, analog and neuromorphic computing possibilities. A systematic discussion about the fundamental nature of the device is almost absent within the memristor community. Advocates use incomplete constitutive relationships, ignore concepts of activity/passivity and aver that nonlinearity is central to their case. Few researchers have examined these claims. Our report investigates the assertion that the memristor is a fundamental passive circuit element, from the fresh perspective that electrical engineering is the science of charge management. We demonstrate with a periodic table of fundamental elements that the 2008 memristor is not the 1971 postulate and neither of them is fundamental. The ideal memristor is an unphysical active device and any physically realizable memristor is a nonlinear composition of resistors with active hysteresis. We also show that there exists only three fundamental passive circuit elements. Twit Text FOAVip The case for rejecting the memristor as a fundamental circuit element ????Sci Rep http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=30030498 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=30030498 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|30030498}}</ref> The case for rejecting the memristor as a fundamental circuit element #MMPMID30030498 Abraham I Sci Rep 2018[]; 8 (ä): ä PMID30030498show ga The memory resistor with the moniker memristor was a harmless postulate in 1971. Since 2008 a device that claims to be the memristor is on the prowl, seeking recognition as a fundamental circuit element, sometimes wanting electronics textbooks to be rewritten, always promising remarkable digital, analog and neuromorphic computing possibilities. A systematic discussion about the fundamental nature of the device is almost absent within the memristor community. Advocates use incomplete constitutive relationships, ignore concepts of activity/passivity and aver that nonlinearity is central to their case. Few researchers have examined these claims. Our report investigates the assertion that the memristor is a fundamental passive circuit element, from the fresh perspective that electrical engineering is the science of charge management. We demonstrate with a periodic table of fundamental elements that the 2008 memristor is not the 1971 postulate and neither of them is fundamental. The ideal memristor is an unphysical active device and any physically realizable memristor is a nonlinear composition of resistors with active hysteresis. We also show that there exists only three fundamental passive circuit elements. äThe case for rejecting the memristor as a fundamental circuit element (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing