Exact Energy usage in an AC-R circuit

  • Thread starter Thread starter azi100
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Energy
AI Thread Summary
In an AC circuit with a resistor, the voltage drop equals the emf, but the work done on charges moving through the resistor does not equate to the energy dissipated as heat. The kinetic energy of charges changes due to the alternating nature of the current, suggesting that energy lost to heat cannot simply equal the energy supplied by the electric field (VI). A more comprehensive analysis may involve examining changes in the potential energy of the electric field, which is complex due to the field's distribution beyond the wire. The discussion raises questions about the relationship between energy input and dissipation, particularly in the context of kinetic energy changes. The proposed approach of relating kinetic energy to current squared may offer insights into energy loss, but its validity remains uncertain.
azi100
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Consider a circuit with an AC source (time varying emf) and a resistor. The voltage drop through the resistor is of course equal to the emf.

Consider the region which bounds the resistor.

The work done on a charge as it moves from one end of the resistor to the other (and in turn the change in kinetic energy) is equal to the work done by the electric field (at the rate VI) - the work done by the resistor (dissipated in the form of heat). Since the kinetic energy of the charge is changing (this is an AC circuit and so its velocity must change) it cannot be true that the energy dissipated by heat is = to the energy put in by the electric field, so why would the energy dissipated by heat by VI (as most physics textbooks say).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And if it is not VI then what is it? I presume a more complete treatment would involve looking at the change in the potential energy of the E-field, but I cannot figure out the best way to do this since the E field is not completely contained to within the wire.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
azi100 said:
Since the kinetic energy of the charge is changing (this is an AC circuit and so its velocity must change) it cannot be true that the energy dissipated by heat is = to the energy put in by the electric field
Why couldn't that be true?
 
Well if the energy put in by the electric field is all lost to heat then no work is done on the charges and so there kinetic energy must remain constant.
 
anyone??

the only progress i have made is to assume that kinetic energy is equal to k*I^2 where k is some constant so that d Ke /dt = k*I*I' and from there I can derive the amount of energy lost to heat. Do you think this is the right approach?
 
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 '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...
Back
Top