# Charging potential vs time graph.

## Main Question or Discussion Point

Why don't we simply take t as x? why is it t?

Where is the time constant.

If you're looking at a question mark instead of the symbol "tau"...you know its tau.

Last edited:

Related Classical Physics News on Phys.org
Andrew Mason
Homework Helper
Why don't we simply take t as x? why is it t?
You might get an answer if you explained what the question is.

AM

On one axis we have the charging current/voltage, while on the other instead of time (t) we have t ...why?

And yeah...latex is still giving problems?...I think I got a cache problem.

jtbell
Mentor
This picture shows what I'm seeing:

#### Attachments

• 5 KB Views: 384
Actually I'm on linux, and so this website seems MS friendly.

So that 'tau' seems like a matrix in windows.

So if you encounter any sorta weird symbols, take it as 'tau' or time constant.

jtbell
Mentor
So are you trying to write $t / \tau$?

ITs t*tau not t/tau.

Latex just started working for me!

$$t \tau$$...this is what I mean.

Last edited:
jtbell
Mentor

I've seen many capacitor charging/discharging graphs that use $t / \tau$ on one of the axes, but never one that uses $t \tau$. Are you sure the $\tau$ isn't a subscript, i.e. $t_{\tau}$?

jtbell
Mentor
Are you referring to graphs like this one?

The horizontal scale markings indicate $t = \tau$, $t = 2 \tau$, $t = 3 \tau$, etc. This means the same thing as $t / \tau = 1$, $t / \tau = 2$, $t / \tau = 3$, etc.

The 1, 2, 3, etc. are not t's. t and $\tau$ both have units of time, so the numbers are dimensionless.

Yeah...the same thing.

So why did this $$\tau$$ stuff pop by?...why not simply use time?

Born2bwire
Gold Member
Normalization, the time constant will vary between different values of R and C but as long as you plot the time axis in terms of the time constant then the plots will all be the same (barring differences in the magnitude of the initial voltage).

Oh...you mean to maintain the nature of the graph...right?

Born2bwire