Original post by Joinedup
I guess you're supposed to assume when S2 is closed it has zero resistance.
what's having a zero resistance in parallel going to do to the voltage across resistor B and what's the current in B resulting from that voltage going to be?
what's having a zero resistance in parallel going to do to the voltage across resistor B and what's the current in B resulting from that voltage going to be?
If something has no resistance than maybe it has no potential difference across it and no p.d represents that no current is flowing through it. If that was the case then all the current would've been flowing through wire of resistor B, and it should have had been considered even when switch S2 was closed. But when i don't consider it in the circuit when switch S2 is closed, then I get the answers stated in the mark scheme. I think that I'd have confused you too- would you like me to post the whole question OR you understand what I'm trying to say?
Edit: As the questions call these labelled things 'elements' - the examiner report says that when switch S2 will be closed the 'element' B won't be operating. That looks pretty strange to me.
(edited 13 years ago)
Yeh they're called circuit 'elements' 
Dude you're being thrown off by silly words! This is what I always hated about A-level/IB physics, their idea of difficulty is wording a question weirdly rather than raw problem solving.
Currents take the path of least resistance, so naturally most of the charge will flow through S2 and completely ignore the element. This is sort of how short circuiting works.
If you look at the equation I = V/R, as R -> 0 then I -> infinite. So mathematically, the current through S2 is much larger than the current through the element.
It may also help to think of this at the most fundamental level. If a system can avoid doing work against something (which would be the case if current flowed through the resistor, hence why you had a potential across it anyway) then it will do it, i.e. all systems try to minimise its energy.
Dude you're being thrown off by silly words! This is what I always hated about A-level/IB physics, their idea of difficulty is wording a question weirdly rather than raw problem solving.Currents take the path of least resistance, so naturally most of the charge will flow through S2 and completely ignore the element. This is sort of how short circuiting works.
If you look at the equation I = V/R, as R -> 0 then I -> infinite. So mathematically, the current through S2 is much larger than the current through the element.
It may also help to think of this at the most fundamental level. If a system can avoid doing work against something (which would be the case if current flowed through the resistor, hence why you had a potential across it anyway) then it will do it, i.e. all systems try to minimise its energy.
Original post by trm90
Yeh they're called circuit 'elements' Dude you're being thrown off by silly words! This is what I always hated about A-level/IB physics, their idea of difficulty is wording a question weirdly rather than raw problem solving.
Currents take the path of least resistance, so naturally most of the charge will flow through S2 and completely ignore the element. This is sort of how short circuiting works.
If you look at the equation I = V/R, as R -> 0 then I -> infinite. So mathematically, the current through S2 is much larger than the current through the element.
It may also help to think of this at the most fundamental level. If a system can avoid doing work against something (which would be the case if current flowed through the resistor, hence why you had a potential across it anyway) then it will do it, i.e. all systems try to minimise its energy.
Dude you're being thrown off by silly words! This is what I always hated about A-level/IB physics, their idea of difficulty is wording a question weirdly rather than raw problem solving.Currents take the path of least resistance, so naturally most of the charge will flow through S2 and completely ignore the element. This is sort of how short circuiting works.
If you look at the equation I = V/R, as R -> 0 then I -> infinite. So mathematically, the current through S2 is much larger than the current through the element.
It may also help to think of this at the most fundamental level. If a system can avoid doing work against something (which would be the case if current flowed through the resistor, hence why you had a potential across it anyway) then it will do it, i.e. all systems try to minimise its energy.
Oh, cool!
So should I always remember and apply this whenever any element is connected in parallel with a wire with zero resistance? And btw if in future any question asks the disadvantage of a circuit like this, then may I write that it will cause short circuit?Original post by Zishi
Oh, cool! So should I always remember and apply this whenever any element is connected in parallel with a wire with zero resistance? And btw if in future any question asks the disadvantage of a circuit like this, then may I write that it will cause short circuit?
So should I always remember and apply this whenever any element is connected in parallel with a wire with zero resistance? And btw if in future any question asks the disadvantage of a circuit like this, then may I write that it will cause short circuit?No I wouldn't do that - the informal use of 'short circuit' is whan someone's talking about an unexpected, accidental electrical fault...
if it's not an accident, not unexpected (i.e. part of the way a circuit has been designed to work) and isn't a fault it's not really a disadvantage - just a technical description of how a bit of circcuit works.
Original post by Joinedup
No I wouldn't do that - the informal use of 'short circuit' is whan someone's talking about an unexpected, accidental electrical fault...
if it's not an accident, not unexpected (i.e. part of the way a circuit has been designed to work) and isn't a fault it's not really a disadvantage - just a technical description of how a bit of circcuit works.
if it's not an accident, not unexpected (i.e. part of the way a circuit has been designed to work) and isn't a fault it's not really a disadvantage - just a technical description of how a bit of circcuit works.
Oh, as trm90 said that this is sort of how short circuiting works that's why I was asking.
So when's a circuit shorted btw?Original post by Zishi
Oh, as trm90 said that this is sort of how short circuiting works that's why I was asking. So when's a circuit shorted btw?
So when's a circuit shorted btw?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_circuit
like it says it's only normal to call something a short circuit if it's abnormal.
Original post by Joinedup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_circuit
like it says it's only normal to call something a short circuit if it's abnormal.
like it says it's only normal to call something a short circuit if it's abnormal.
Oh, I got it. Thanks.
Original post by Joinedup
I shouldn't have used 'normal' and 'abnormal' in the same sentence like that.
glad you've got it.
an example of a short circuit would be a fault caused by a rat chewing the insulation off a flex till the different conductors touched each other.
glad you've got it.
an example of a short circuit would be a fault caused by a rat chewing the insulation off a flex till the different conductors touched each other.
So is it obvious that a short circuit will result in heating up of an element?
Original post by Zishi
So is it obvious that a short circuit will result in heating up of an element?
in the rat gnawing example it'd probably just blow a fuse (or trip a circuit breaker) or start a fire.
I'd avoid using the phrase 'short circuit' in exams unless you're definately talking about an abnormal event - and not closing a switch. I think we were discouraged from using 'short circuit' altogether when I did A level physics as it's entered the general non-technical language to mean any sort of electrical fault.
Original post by Joinedup
in the rat gnawing example it'd probably just blow a fuse (or trip a circuit breaker) or start a fire.
I'd avoid using the phrase 'short circuit' in exams unless you're definately talking about an abnormal event - and not closing a switch. I think we were discouraged from using 'short circuit' altogether when I did A level physics as it's entered the general non-technical language to mean any sort of electrical fault.
I'd avoid using the phrase 'short circuit' in exams unless you're definately talking about an abnormal event - and not closing a switch. I think we were discouraged from using 'short circuit' altogether when I did A level physics as it's entered the general non-technical language to mean any sort of electrical fault.
Hmm, I'll be careful with that word, then.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- HNC electrical engineering
- RLC circuit
- electrical schematics and analyzing signals
- ac theory question
- Superposition theorem problem
- Resistance of the LDR
- HNC Electrical engineering
- Confusing Capacitor question
- help! two quick Dc electricity questions
- Use a simulator to produce a resonance curve between 800 Hz and 4.5 kH
- Isaac physics C4a.2 - struggling
- Isaac Physics.
- Circuits Question
- In what circumstance would a variable resistor be unaccepted to vary voltage?
- Physics GCSE question
- HNC science
- Capacitor Question (PHYS)
- Electricity question help
- Capacitors
- HELP! How do i draw this diagram?
