Applying Kirchoff's law to circuit which only has cells

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around applying Kirchhoff's laws to a circuit consisting solely of cells with negligible internal resistance. The original poster seeks to determine the voltage across points A and B in two scenarios: one with cells oriented normally and another with one cell's polarity reversed.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the application of Kirchhoff's second law to derive the voltage across A and B, questioning the implications of reversing a cell's polarity. There is a discussion about the necessity of including current and resistance in the analysis, with some participants suggesting that the absence of resistance leads to contradictions in energy conservation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various interpretations being explored regarding the role of internal resistance and the implications of applying Kirchhoff's laws under different assumptions. Some participants express confusion about the necessity of current in the analysis, while others highlight the theoretical nature of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may violate principles of energy conservation if cells are treated as having zero resistance, raising questions about the validity of the assumptions made in the circuit model.

mahela007
Messages
105
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the Voltage across A B in the following circuit. Each cells has negligible internal resistance and an EMF of E volts.
(First diagram in the attached picture)

Homework Equations


I'm trying to use Kirchoff's second law.

The Attempt at a Solution


Now, if I traverse the RSTU loop in the clockwise direction, I find that VAB = 2E.
Similarly, if I traverse the loop RQPU, I also get VAB = 2E.
In this case, traversing either loop gives the same answer for VAB

But what if the polarity of cell TS (the top most cell) was reversed as in the second diagram?
In this case, applying Kirchoff's law to loops RSTU and RQPU yields different results for VAB.. so in such a case, what is the actual value of VAB
 

Attachments

  • Cicruit.JPG
    Cicruit.JPG
    17.5 KB · Views: 459
Physics news on Phys.org
The second case has no solution. It would imply an infinite current flowing in the circuit.
It is impossible to determine Vab.
 
hi mahela007! :smile:

sorry, but that makes no sense :redface:

Kirchhoff's rules require current, and you haven't included any

(and there's no such thing as circuits or cells without resistance, you have to include a resistance somewhere on each loop)
 
Do we need to consider the current? Don't the cells maintain a potential difference equal to their EMF because they don't have internal resistance?
 
all cells have internal resistance!

(even you said "negligible" … that's not zero!)
 
lol... ok then.
Let's say for theoretical purposes that a cell had 0 resistance.
Kirchoff's second law says that the algebraic sum of potential differences around a closed loop is 0. The (imaginary) batteries maintain a constant voltage across their terminals. So shouldn't we be able to apply K's law? (regardless of the current that is flowing in this case)

EDIT:
WHOOPS.
I was wondering about this for all of about 5 mins.. then it dawned on me that this model is a violoation of the principle of the conservation of energy. If charge is flowing from one terminal to the other, then some energy must be liberated because of the potential difference. If there is no resistance, no energy can be liberated..

Thanks for all your help.
 
mahela007 said:
lol... ok then.
Let's say for theoretical purposes that a cell had 0 resistance.
Kirchoff's second law says that the algebraic sum of potential differences around a closed loop is 0.

Ok, so try to apply it to the outer loop. You have that Va+Vb=0
Let's say Va=Vb=5V, so we have 10=0 ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K