I've read(†) that in AC circuits an ideal transformer with unloaded secondary draws no current in the primary. This is strange, because that's not the case with an ideal inductor (it draws current, though the power consumption is zero). An ideal transformer with unloaded secondary looks like an ideal inductor to me. The secondary has a voltage, but no current, so it doesn't affect the magnetic field and flux.
† Ask any AI chatbot, for example.
An ideal transformer, unloaded, is a infinite inductor ... So, no current.
An ideal inductor (no resistive or capacitive parts) has a finite value, so current.
An ideal transformer with unloaded secondary looks like an ideal inductor to me.
This is true for the real ones - a real transformer with unloaded secondary is a real inductor. The primary has some finnite inductance and the secondary adds some (usually negligible) parasitic capacitance.
In a DIY setup when using what's available, it is normal to use a transformer instead of inductor if you don't mind the large uncertainity of the inductance value and some other quirks.
The ideal transformer is not simply made of two coupled ideal inductors (ideal inductors don't couple to anything anyway).
It has one more ideal thing - both of these inductors have infinite inductance, but at the same time the ratio of these infinite inductances is indeed finite and specified.
An ideal transformer has a magnetic core with infinite permeability. Check here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer#Ideal_transformer
An ideal inductor however has not an infinite permeability magnetic core. An inductor with infinite permeability would never draw current as its inductance is infinite.
That is like saying that the wires of an ideal transformer has zero resistance. But an ideal resistor has still some resistance, otherwise it wouldn't make sense defining such an ideal resistor.
It's all a matter of definitions in the end.
