Confusion with regards to power lines and the power lost

AI Thread Summary
Power loss in transmission lines is calculated using P=I²R, where increasing voltage reduces current and thus decreases power loss. The confusion arises from the relationship between voltage and power loss; while P=V²/R suggests higher voltage could increase power loss, this only applies to the load, not the transmission lines. The relevant voltage for calculating power loss is across the transmission cables, not the load. It's important to distinguish between ohmic and non-ohmic conductors, as this affects the validity of the calculations. Understanding these concepts clarifies how power is dissipated in transmission systems.
Coolamebe
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Ok, so the title was pretty vague, I'm not sure how to succinctly describe the confusion. Anyway, so I've learned that the power lost is P=I2R, and so by increasing the voltage, as P=VI and is constant, the current will be lowered, and thus the power lost will decrease.
I'm confused about a couple things. While my physics teacher was specifically talking about P=I2R, should not P=V2/R also give the value, and so by increasing the voltage we increase the power lost? Is this not a contradiction?
I feel like it could be remedied if the wires in power lines are not ohmic conductors and so half the math I did above is invalid.
Anyway, any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The calculation relates to the power dissipated (lost) in the transmission cables so the voltage you need is the voltage across the cables. I think you are confusing this with the voltage across the load (at the end of the cables)
 
lychette said:
The calculation relates to the power dissipated (lost) in the transmission cables so the voltage you need is the voltage across the cables. I think you are confusing this with the voltage across the load (at the end of the cables)
Can you explain this a little more in depth? My teacher explained this very superficially so I'm not too sure on this.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top