Difference between emf and potential difference

[cupid.callin]

I read this topic in many books but i really can't figure out what really the difference is!

Please someone help me out!

One of the book differentiated them as follows ...


emf is the work done by the battery force (Fb) in moving unit charge from one electrode to another.
emf is due to the battery force which is not electrostatic and due to some battery mechanism. therefore it do not decrease with time when battery is in use.
while potential difference is due to the charges on 2 electrodes. as battery is used, charges on the 2 electrodes decrease and therefore potential difference decrease with time,

When battery is in open circuit...

Fb = Fe (electrostatic force due to charges on electrodes)
Fb = qE
Fb (d) = qEd
Wb = qEd

Wb/q = V

emf = V



Now what i really need to know is that if after using battery even for 1 sec emf is not = V (except for ideal battery which obviously don't exist! WHY DO WE DEFINE EMF? WhAT IS THE NEED TO DEFINE IT!

i can't explain my exact question as even i have no idea what i want to ask ... please explain me anything about emf and V ... anything that do not raise more questions in my mind!

 

[Studiot]

Look again at your book.

If it genuinely states what you have quoted I would abandon this book. EMF is not a measure of work or energy.

Both EMF and PD are measured in volts.
An EMF is an energy source. A PD is not.
An EMF can introduce energy to a system, a PD cannot.

I note from your other posts you understand the concept of an electric field around a charge.

Consider a single isolated charge. It creates (induces) a surrounding electric field that varies with distance from the charge.
The difference between the electric potential at two points, A and B, is measured in volts and called the Potential Difference.
However if you connected a resistor between points A and B, no current would flow.

Now consider you battery, with the same voltage across its terminals as the PD between A and B above.

If you connect the same resistor across these terminals a current will flow, as defined by Ohms law.

The battery is introducing energy into the system, ie it is acting as an energy source. The rate of energy introduction (flow) is given by the product of the current and the EMF

Watts = Volts x Amps = (Volts)²/ Resistance

Since for a given system (resistor) the current is fixed by the resistor we say that the EMF is a measure of the energy available to that system.

Hope this helps.

 

[tiny-tim]

Hi Studiot!

I don't mind admitting I get very confused by emf.

Is this right? …

Consider a single isolated charge. It creates (induces) a surrounding electric field that varies with distance from the charge.
The difference between the electric potential at two points, A and B, is measured in volts and called the Potential Difference.
However if you connected a resistor between points A and B, no current would flow.

If there's a conductor connecting A and B, won't a charge opposite to the isolated charge build up on the nearer end, and an equal charge opposing it on the further end?

So while it's building up, isn't there a current, which gradually diminishes because of the gradually increasing opposing emf of the isolated charge of AB itself?

 

[Studiot]

Hello Tiny-Tim, that is an interesting proposition,

So while it's building up, isn't there a current, which gradually diminishes because of the gradually increasing opposing emf of the isolated charge of AB itself?

Such a current in my resistor (remember I specified a resistor?) would dissipate ohmic heating energy.

Where would this energy come from?

Would it diminish the charge supplying the field?

Could I reduce said charge to zero by introducing many resistors?

If it didn't diminish the charge, could I use the effect to establish a perpetual motion (heating) machine by introducing resistor after resistor?

 

[tiny-tim]

You're asking me?

 

[Studiot]

Well I'm sort of offering the reasoning behind my original statement.

If there's a conductor connecting A and B, won't a charge opposite to the isolated charge build up on the nearer end, and an equal charge opposing it on the further end?

And doesn't this describe a capacitor?

 

[Studiot]

anything that do not raise more questions in my mind

I am trying to bear this in mind and avoid making things too complicated. I am also trying to avoid Kirchoff and the KVL controversy.

An electric field cannot exist inside a conductor, so the introduction of a conductor 'shorts' the points A and B to the same potential. An electric field can only exist in a dielectric medium.

The main point is that

an EMF introduces energy into a circuit.

a PD dissipates energy in a circuit.

 

[tiny-tim]

And doesn't this describe a capacitor?

No, a capacitor has a gap … this conductor is continuous from A to B.

An electric field cannot exist inside a conductor, so the introduction of a conductor 'shorts' the points A and B to the same potential. An electric field can only exist in a dielectric medium.

No, a field can exist inside a conductor … it takes time to short A and B to the same potential, and the field exists until the current has had time to build up an emf opposing it … from Scott Hughes' 2005 MIT lecture http://web.mit.edu/sahughes/www/8.022/lec05.pdf" …

• There is no electric field inside a conductor. Why? Suppose we bring a plus charge near a conductor. For a very short moment, there will be an electric field inside the conductor. However, this field will act on and move the electrons, which are free to move about. The electrons will move close to the plus charge, leaving net positive charge behind. The conductor’s charges will continue to move until the “external” E-field is canceled out — at that point there is no longer an E-field to move them, so they stay still.

A more accurate statement of this rule is “After a very short time, there is no electric field inside a conductor”. How short a time is it? Recall that in cgs units, resistivity (which tells us how good/bad something conducts electricity) is measured in seconds. It turns out that the time it takes for the charges to rearrange themselves to cancel out the external E-field is just about equal to this resistivity. For metals, this is a time that is something like 10⁻¹⁶ − 10⁻¹⁷ seconds. This is so short that we can hardly complain that the original statement isn’t precise enough!​

 

[cupid.callin]

Hi,

Thanks for the replies!

actually my book defines emf approximately as wikipedia:

In physics, electromotive force, or most commonly emf (seldom capitalized), or (occasionally) electromotance is "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow."

More formally, emf is the external work expended per unit of charge to produce an electric potential difference across two open-circuited terminals.[2][3] The electric potential difference is created by separating positive and negative charges, thereby generating an electric field.[4][5] The created electrical potential difference drives current flow if a circuit is attached to the source of emf. When current flows, however, the voltage across the terminals of the source of emf is no longer the open-circuit value, due to voltage drops inside the device due to its internal resistance.

And well i agree with tiny-tim that a single charge will also cause current in wire, the time of current depending on the magnitude of charge ...
and i guess this might not work for the resistor ... but still ... Studiot said that VD can't provide current, which i suppose is wrong!

An EMF is an energy source. A PD is not.

emf don't provide energy to the circuit, it just charges the battery

And the charges accumulated provide PD which provide energy to the battery,,, i suppose!

an EMF introduces energy into a circuit.

a PD dissipates energy in a circuit.

Actually an emf creates energy that can be utilized by the PD to provide current and heating...


and conductor AB is not comparable to a capacitor, if you say that charge cannot provide current to resistor, how can it provide current to capacitor ,,, capacitor is (in a way) like an open circuit(unless we use a dielectric) of infinite resistance ... and the energy lost in charging a capacitor is more that making a current through a resistor...

@ tiny tim

can you explain me how cgs unit of resistivity comes out to be s?
you may use this relation: ρ = 2m/nte^2

t is the average time b/w two collisions of electron of material.

 

[vish_al210]

In physics, electromotive force, or most commonly emf (seldom capitalized), or (occasionally) electromotance is "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow."
More formally, emf is the external work expended per unit of charge to produce an electric potential difference across two open-circuited terminals...The created electrical potential difference drives current flow if a circuit is attached to the source of emf. ...
Devices that can provide emf include voltaic cells, ..."A source of emf can be thought of as a kind of charge pump that acts to move positive charge from a point of low potential through its interior to a point of high potential. … By chemical, mechanical or other means, the source of emf performs work dW on that charge to move it to the high potential terminal. The emf ℰ of the source is defined as the work dW done per charge dq: ℰ = dW/dq."
So states Wikipedia..

What is stated is that emf can cause Potential difference, and the potential difference can induce an emf.

1. if you induce an emf into a conductor, the emf causes charge to flow and align away from each other(seperates +ve from -ve). Hence the term workdone is also used. The effect of the emf is Voltage or potential difference.
2. If there exist 2 conductors with different potentials such that their difference in potential is V, then when a third neutral conductor or resistor is placed to connect them, an emf is induced in the third conductor by the potential difference of the earlier 2 conductors. this emf causes the charges to flow.

Hope it enabled you to understand the relationship of the emf and Potential Difference and the difference in the usage of the term. There is no difference in emf and Potential difference, the discretion is in the usage of the term, depending on what we are trying to talk about.

Also look at the answer suggested here:: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080429103215AAXVBjF

But better still, take a look at this example.. this kinda states it clearly and also why emf is associated with sources and potential diffences with sources and sinks.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080429103215AAXVBjF
Hope this makes some sense if not all... take care...

 

[tiny-tim]

can you explain me how cgs unit of resistivity comes out to be s?

In cgs units (ESU or Gaussian versions), capacitance is measured in cm, and conductance is measured in cm/s … see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cgs_units#Electromagnetic_units_in_various_CGS_systems" for details …

so resistance is measured in s/cm (instead of Ω),

and resistivity is measured in seconds (instead of Ω.cm).

 

[Studiot]

Since you are all adamant that a current flows in my test resistor would anyone like to explain why this does not contravene the law of conservation of energy.

If what you say is true, I can extract energy indefinitely (as heat) from the charge by repeating the test, each time causing an (albeit small) current to flow through the resistor.

 

[Studiot]

More formally, emf is the external work expended per unit of charge to produce an electric potential difference across two open-circuited terminals...

Voltage is not a unit of energy and EMF is measured in volts, so how can you define it as work?

We have already had this post#2 line 2

emf (seldom capitalized)

EMF is usually capitalised and even afforded its own symbol a copperplate script capital E.

2. If there exist 2 conductors with different potentials such that their difference in potential is V, then when a third neutral conductor or resistor is placed to connect them, an emf is induced in the third conductor by the potential difference of the earlier 2 conductors. this emf causes the charges to flow.

EMFs are not 'induced'

No, a capacitor has a gap … this conductor is continuous from A to B.

There is a gap between A and B. It is filled with a dielectric medium (free space) and a capacitance exists even in this condition.

You are suggesting that a resistor can exist with a potential difference between its ends and pass no current in a steady state condition. Your temporary current is a transient.

 

[tiny-tim]

What is the set-up?

If we're bringing a resistor AB near a static charge, then away, then near, and so on, then each time we move the resistor near, we have to do a tiny amount of work (against the resistance for a tiny amount of time) to get it there … that works ends up as heat.

 

[Studiot]

If we're bringing a resistor AB near a static charge, then away, then near, and so on, then each time we move the resistor near, we have to do a tiny amount of work (against the resistance

What work is this?

We could also leave the resistor where it is and switch the charge on and off (via electrostatic shielding).

College Physics - Google Books Result
Raymond A. Serway, Chris Vuille, Jerry S. Faughn - 2008 - Science - 1120 pages
Further, because the electric field inside a conductor is zero, no work is required to move a charge between two points inside the conductor. ...books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=0495386936...

My underlining

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...a conductor in an electrostatic field&f=false

 

[vish_al210]

EMF is usually capitalised and even afforded its own symbol a copperplate script capital E.

EMFs are not 'induced'

I know i aint smart nd neither is my english, so please excuse me on my follies... It is not that I know more, so I don't accuse of ur anger originating from jealousy. .. ;)

Well jokes apart.. I just found these references about emf also being induced.. (emf is induce-able) .. So if you would like to know more of induced emfs then please read the following.. And anyways the definition of emf being not written in capitals is not mine but of wiki...
http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/InducedEMF.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday's_law_of_induction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromotive_force
http://class.phys.psu.edu/212labs/09_induction/faradays_law_and_induced_emf.pdf
http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/InducedEMFThroughAWire/
http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/InducedEMF.html

and most of all... please read this 'Studiot' :: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=139529A lot of applications, principles and development owes itself to the fact that emfs can be induced...

 

[tiny-tim]

You are suggesting that a resistor can exist with a potential difference between its ends and pass no current in a steady state condition. Your temporary current is a transient.

NO, I'm never suggested a steady state current. From my first post, I was suggesting …

If there's a conductor connecting A and B, won't a charge opposite to the isolated charge build up on the nearer end, and an equal charge opposing it on the further end?

So while it's building up, isn't there a current, which gradually diminishes because of the gradually increasing opposing emf of the isolated charge of AB itself?

What work is this?

The work done moving an increasingly bipolar material through an electric field

We could also leave the resistor where it is and switch the charge on and off (via electrostatic shielding).

That just makes identifying the work more complicated … doesn't placing shielding inevitably do work against the field?

(Did you have a particular shielding set-up in mind?)

 

[Studiot]

What magnetic effects are we talking about here vish_al210?

 

[vish_al210]

please explain me anything about emf and V ... anything that do not raise more questions in my mind!

Simply put, the potential difference of any voltage source can also be termed as emf as it causes charge to flow. The potential difference across any other passive components cannot be termed as emf as it is not the cause of the current flow.

 

[Studiot]

NO, I'm never suggested a steady state current. From my first post, I was suggesting …

What is this if not a transient current, which results in the test resistor having a potential difference across its end permanently so long as it is in place? I didn't say a steady state current I (and you) said a steady state voltage. I am asking how you can have a steady state voltage across a resistor without a current then flowing?

If there's a conductor connecting A and B, won't a charge opposite to the isolated charge build up on the nearer end, and an equal charge opposing it on the further end?

 

[Studiot]

Simply put, the potential difference of any voltage source can also be termed as emf as it causes charge to flow. The potential difference across any other passive components cannot be termed as emf as it is not the cause of the current flow.

Excellent rephrasing of what I said.

 

[vish_al210]

sorry if I appear to be rephrasing dude... I didn't notice... anyways.. this is what I had posted earlier as well... anyways it is not about who but about what..
So if it makes u feel any better,
""If anything I posted is simillar to what'Studiot' posted, please take it as me seconding his opinion...""

 

[vish_al210]

Well even in a transformer the voltage in the secondary is an induced emf...
take care...

 

[Dadface]

E.M.F. snd P.D. are both measured in volts and both can be defined in terms of energy as in accordance with the equation:
Volts=Joules/Coulombs
The difference is that E.M.F. refers to the supply and the total voltage(voltage across whole external circuit plus voltage lost across internal resistance of supply) whereas pd refers to the voltage across specific points in the circuit.We can make formal definitions.
Examples:
1.If a supply has an E.M.F.equal to E then in passing a charge Q round a circuit connected to it ,it transfers an amount of elecrical energy equal to QE.
2.The emf of a supply is the ratio of the electrical power which it generates to the current which it delivers.

 

[tiny-tim]

You are suggesting that a resistor can exist with a potential difference between its ends and pass no current in a steady state condition. Your temporary current is a transient.

NO, I'm never suggested a steady state current. From my first post, I was suggesting …

If there's a conductor connecting A and B, won't a charge opposite to the isolated charge build up on the nearer end, and an equal charge opposing it on the further end?

So while it's building up, isn't there a current, which gradually diminishes because of the gradually increasing opposing emf of the isolated charge of AB itself?

What is this if not a transient current, which results in the test resistor having a potential difference across its end permanently so long as it is in place?

(I assume by "transient" you mean "temporary"?)

Yes, it's a a temporary current, which results in a displacement of charges within the resistor.

But no, there's no potential difference once the movement has stopped … the p.d. from the applied field is cancelled by the p.d. of the field due to the separated charges …

what else can cancel it? …

total p.d. zero?​

I didn't say a stedy state current I (and you) said a steady state voltage. I am asking how you can have a steady state voltage across a resistor without a current then flowing?

Nobody mentioned "steady" until you did in post #13. I certainly made it clear from the beginning that it wasn't steady, using the phrases "while it's building up" and "gradually diminishes".

 

[Studiot]

Hello Tiny Tim, I think our discussion is getting off topic for this thread and would better be continued elsewhere. My fault as much as anything as I introduced the herring.

Thank you to others for pulling it back.

 

[cupid.callin]

So a resistor near a charge do not show any change… but if we move it back or forth or turn charge on and off, it will show some instantaneous current and voltage??

And studiot, a capacitor with dielectric and a conductor are not same.
Dielectric is a material with polar molecules which just align when electric field is applied. They don’t conduct like conductors as there are no free electrons, just polar molecules.

And wiki defines EMF as work “per unit charge” not work. Check V and W/q dimensionally … they match!And please tell me one thing … ““ Iin case of battery, EMF is the charging force or not? ””

 

[cupid.callin]

And guys you are welcome to continue your discussion here!

Everyone can use some extra knowledge!

 

[vish_al210]

And please tell me one thing … ““ Iin case of battery, EMF is the charging force or not? ””

Well cupid,
The potential difference in the battery was developed (considering a rechargeable battery) due to the emf of the charging ckt. Now the voltage created in the battery generates an emf in the ckt that it is connected to. But the emf ceases to exist when the ckt is removed or opened. Then it is only potential difference of the battery.

And there is no current induced or acted when u hold a conductor/resistor/inductor to one end of the battery alone, the potential is raised, but no consumption of power takes place(atleast not the least bit significant..). the current flow happens only when the ckt is closed.

 

[vish_al210]

And yes... even if you connect that resistor//conductor//inductor to one end of an AC Voltage source,... still no current//power is consumed...

 

[cupid.callin]

So you don't agree with tiny-tim that by moving a resistor we can produce current in a resistor ... because his explanation sounds very satisfactory to me!

 

[vish_al210]

I am not disagreeing with him or anyone else as the context he is proposing the theory in, is different... It is a supposition..
but if you connect one end of the ac mains to one end of an ammeter and the other end of the ammeter to one end of a resistor, leaving the other end of the resistor and the other end of the AC mains open, you would find that no current flowed through the ckt. and that no real power was consumed...
I am also perplexed by this.. but reality s___s...It never let's our million dollar plans realize...
Or else regardless of you leaving a switch open or in off condition, the power would still be consumed... and that would not be a good thing for ur bill and the energy conservationists..."Reality is generally fluid...until we fall face first on it... then we reaise that it actually is rock hard..., alas realisation is a little too late always..." by me...

 

[Studiot]

Tiny Tim you are correct, many thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Here is a scanned extract.

 

[tiny-tim]

Thanks, Studiot.

I still get really confused about emf …

people keep saying that there's a difference between emf and pd, but I've never managed to grasp it.

 

[Studiot]

I have been doing some calculations, based upon what you said, about moving a dipole from infinity to A_B in the field of an isolated charge.

I have no time tonight as it is past the witching hour here, but am quite clear about the difference between the terms. I was trying to be too clever introducing potential fields and tripped myself up.

The difference really has nothing to do with fields. I will post again.

 

[facenian]

Here's another approach: Consider that the emf concept refer to electric circuits only therefore it is not a general concept from the physicist stand point,ie, electromagnetic theory. EMF is usued in the cuasi-stationary regime and can be defined as:
emf=\oint\vec{E}\cdot\vec{dr}.
Now if we remember
\vec{E}=-\nabla\phi-\frac{\partial\vec{A}}{\partial t}
so if we consider only electromagnetic forces the only source of emf is of magnetic origen.
Now if we consider as E in the integral the total force per unit charge in the circuit(and this would includ quemical forces in a battery for intance) we may call this an "efective electic field" if you wish you may reconcile what is ussually defined as emf in more elementary textbooks.

 

[Loro]

No one has actually said what I think is most important, so I'll add it:
I think the difference has got a lot to do with fields.

Emf is defined in general as a line integral of E*dL along a path. If we choose two endpoints we may or may not get the same emf when we compute it along two different paths.

If the emf calculated between two points is independent of path, we call that E-field "conservative". In such fields we define potential at a point - as an integral of E*dr from infinity to that point. Then we can talk about the potential difference (= voltage) between two points A and B as an integral of E*dr from A to B.

If the emf calculated between two points depends on the path (this means that it can be nonzero, around a closed loop), then that E-field is called "non-conservative". In this case we can't talk about potential differences, because potential is not well-defined (You could get different values for different paths of line integration from infinity to a point).

An example of a non-conservative E-field is an E-field caused by a changing magnetic field passing through a loop of wire. This magnetic field induces an emf around the loop. And in this example we can't talk about potential differences, because the E-field is non-conservative.

But if there are no changing magnetic fields around, all E-fields turn out to be conservative.

So all potential differences are emfs, but not all emfs are potential differences. Potential differences make sense only in conservative fields.

-----------------------------
But in this case of the battery we're dealing with conservative E-fields, so all emfs are in fact potential differences. But there's a distinction between the voltage measured between the electrodes, and this "ideal voltage" which would be there if it had not been for the internal resistance. They needed another name for this ideal voltage so they called it emf.

Perhaps it's been called that because when we talk about this "true" voltage we actually talk about the potential difference between the electrodes - two physical pieces of metal. And the "ideal" voltage is not a potential difference between any two physical points.
It's a voltage of an ideal voltage source, which in parallel with the internal resistance, can model a non-ideal voltage source.

 

[Studiot]

OK first a little bit of history and some definitions.

There are many quantities in Physics that qualify for the term "Potential".
Potential difference simply means exactly that. The difference between potential A and potential B
ie P_A - P_B.
In what follows I will use the term voltage to mean the difference in electrical potential and suppose we can identify such a difference between two points or terminals A and B, in some part of an electrical circuit or arrangement.

Now for the history part. The term PD used to stand for Potential Drop, not Potential Difference, when I first learned it.
So we actually had three terms, EMF, and two confusingly with the same initials, PD. Both potential drop and EMF referred to an identifiable voltage as above.

So why were there two types of voltage identified?

Well imagine we isolate the section of circuit, a bit like a free body diagram in mechanics, and ask the question what happens?

1) If the voltage remains on the isolated section, without the rest of the circuit in place, the voltage is an EMF.

2) If the voltage disappears from the isolated section, ie is only present by virtue of the rest of the circuit then it is a potential drop (PD)

So, for instance,

1)Take a 9 volt battery away from a circuit and there is still 9 volts between the battery terminals.

2)Take a resistor with 9 volts across its ends, in circuit, away from a circuit and all voltage disappears.

 

[cupid.callin]

So does it mean that EMF is self sustaining but PD is caused due to something with emf?

 

[Studiot]

In essence, yes.
But by self sustaining, that just means that whatever causes an EMF voltage is not part of the circuit.

 

[cupid.callin]

OK!
Now i understand EMF a lot better that before ...

Thanks a lot sir,
you've been a big help

 

[Studiot]

There are many implications to this simple viewpoint, generally consistent with the previous posts by others.
In particular the energy view by Dadface is worth discussing further.

 

[facenian]

In essence, yes.
But by self sustaining, that just means that whatever causes an EMF voltage is not part of the circuit.

I have to agree with that, emf are ussually caused by forces allien to the(eletromagnetic) field and are related to things like "external forces" and "source of energy".
I said ussually because it is not always so, for intance if you suddenly cancel the magnetic flux concatenated by a circuit there appears an emf induced according to Faraday's law.
So all this is really confussing not eassy to grasp

 

[Studiot]

There's always one isn't there?

Magnetically sourced EMFs are more difficult to handle, because you have to remove a whole loop (or loops) from the circuit, not just a two port network, to complete the task I described.

A further corollary of 1 and 2 is as follows

1) If you place an EMF in another (different) circuit it will still be the same voltage. So if you connect a 9 volt battery to a different circuit, there is still a 9 volts between its terminals. This is because the voltage is determined by the EMF alone.

2) If you place the resistor with 9 volts across it into a different circuit you will find the voltage across it is, in general, not now 9 volts. This is because the votlage is determined by the rest of the circuit, as well as the resistor.

 

[vish_al210]

In essence, yes.
But by self sustaining, that just means that whatever causes an EMF voltage is not part of the circuit.

I am a little confused with your view point... Please do clarify...
If a battery is a source of EMF, then well it is a part of the circuit.
Every operational ckt has a source of emf attached to it. If there is a transformer then too the primary is a part of the circuit, though electrically isolated. (By electricaly isolated is that faults from the ckt are not observed as is by the primary, but only the electro magnetic effects are felt by the primary, the isolation acts as a surge absorber.)
So how can it be said that the emf source is not a part of the circuit.P.S.: Does a floating capacitor or resistor (by floating I am referring to one end of the element connected to the ckt an the other end left open) consume power, is there a current flow (event 10% of what it is when you connect the element comletely) when connected to an AC ckt?
I don't think so. Please do correct me if I am wrong.

And EMF is not self sustaining, so as to say it dies out or is consumed over time depending on the power stored and rate at which it is consumed.

 

[Studiot]

then well it is a part of the circuit

Not if you remove it!

Of course you no longer have that circuit.

 

[Kaldanis]

This is a simple way that it was explained to me, is it correct?

The EMF is the total value of the power sorce, for example, when a 12V battery is connected to a circuit you would say the EMF is 12V.

The terminal potential difference is the voltage left once you remove the voltage lost to the internal resistance of the battery. So if the 12V battery loses 1V to internal resistance, then the t.p.d. will be 11V?

 

[Whakataku]

To simplify and sum it up, the emf of a cell is the total potential difference the cell can produce around the circuit, including any potential wasted in driving the current through the cell itself.

V = I*R

ε = I *(R+r)
I = V/R
ε = V/R *(R+r)

Where V is the potential difference, ε is the electromotive force, R is the resistance of an external load resistor, and r is the internal resistance of the electrochemical cell.

Say if the resistor of load resistance is close to 0 but not entirely 0, say 0.0000000000000000000000000000000011 Ω,
then ε ~ V *(r)

Correct me if I'm wrong. >: )