Cause & Effect: Ammeter Resistance & Circuit Current

  • Thread starter Thread starter phyphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cause
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a physics question regarding the relationship between an ammeter's resistance and its effect on circuit current. The first statement asserts that an ammeter has very low resistance, while the second claims that the current is negligibly affected when the ammeter is connected in series. There is confusion over whether the second statement explains the first, with some participants believing the opposite is true. Clarification suggests that the second statement is true because of the first, indicating that the ammeter's low resistance is the reason for its minimal impact on current. Overall, the question is criticized for its poor wording and ambiguity.
phyphysics
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I have such a question in my physics book:

There are 2 statements below. Choose a if the second statement is an explanation of the first statement; otherwise, choose b :

1. Ammeter has a very small resistance.

2. The current in the circuit can be said negligibly affected when the ammeter is connected in series with it correctly.

I thought the answer should be b , as I thought that statement 1 should be the explanation of statement 2, not vice versa. But the answer said is a . Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would agree with you. Personally that's a very confusing and badly written question.

~Lyuokdea
 
Allow me to lend my support, gents. It might be a matter of semantics, though; Statement #1 is definitely the basis for Statement #2, but might not necessarily be an explanation for it. Regardless, it's a very poorly presented problem. Given the same choice that you were, I would have chosen similarly.
 
In the future I suggest interpreting it as:

Choose a if the second statement explains why the first statement is true; otherwise, choose b :
 
2 is true *because* 1 is true. The ammeter has low resistance *because* it was made that way (Aristotle's Effective Cause), not because it has a negligible effect on the current.
 
yeah. the reason that there is a negligible effect is that there is a small resistance. besides, the wording in 2 is that "it can be said". so now the question is, why can this be said?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
416
Replies
1
Views
535
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top