The fact that you combine this unfounded and incorrect assumption about current remaining when the element through which it flows is gone with the [correct] way you predicted the current in parallel resistors [where the current through resistor 1 is calculated without any reference to resistors 2 s value or existence or the current that might or might not flow through resistor 2] in the same lab shows you are still not thinking analytically.
Let me put it numerically. I have resistor 1 of 40 ohms with 20 volts across it. A current of 0.5 amps flows through it. I now connect resistor 2 of 20 ohms in parallel with it. Resistor 2 sees the same 20 volts across it and produces a current of 1 amp, while resistor 1 produces the same 0.5 amps. I now disconnect resistor 2 and have resistor 1 in the exact same circumstance it originally was in. Now you are telling me that even though everything is the same as before, it will produce more than 0.5 amps and you would probably say 1.5 amps. I hope by now you realize this makes no sense.
You all should know that the voltage drop across an element [ bulb, resistor, etc.] causes the conduction electrons in that element to move. If you remove that element those electrons are no longer there, the current they provided is gone. The only reason removal of one parallel resistor would increase the current in the other remaining parallel resistors is if there is another resistance in series. In this case, the reduction in current due to the removal of the parallel resistance would reduce the current through the series resistance. This would reduce the voltage drop through the resistance in series, leaving more voltage drop available for the remaining parallel resistances causing an increase in their current. This increase is only very indirectly related to and certainly not equal to, the current that used to flow in the removed resistor.
No comments:
Post a Comment