Finding the absolute error for equation of total resistance

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving the equation for total resistance, ΔRC, in a circuit. The user struggles with the logarithmic properties in their calculations, particularly the incorrect assumption that the logarithm of a sum equals the sum of the logarithms. Another participant suggests isolating ΔR// to simplify the problem, which ultimately helps the user correct their initial mistake. The user acknowledges the errors in their approach and seeks clarification on the justification of certain transitions in the equations. The conversation highlights the importance of proper logarithmic manipulation in solving resistance equations.
AdrianMachin
Messages
40
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Prove the equation for ΔRC. (See the first attachment with the circuit schematic inside)

Homework Equations


(The equation for RC, in both attachments)

The Attempt at a Solution


You can see my attempt at a solution in the second attachment. I'm stuck at the step shown in the picture. Maybe that needs a bit algebra, or my attempt was incorrect.
 

Attachments

  • 111.png
    111.png
    10.3 KB · Views: 500
  • 222.png
    222.png
    11.4 KB · Views: 430
Physics news on Phys.org
I already have difficulty with the first step: If ##R_C = R_{//} + R_3 ## then it certainly is not so that ##\log R_C = \log R_{//} + \log R_3 ## !
And then the ##\Rightarrow## is also unjustified.

I suggest you try to find ##\Delta R_{//}## on its own...
 
  • Like
Likes AdrianMachin
ln(a+b) and ln(a) + ln(b) are not the same (first -> second line and also within the second line) and the result is wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes AdrianMachin
BvU said:
I already have difficulty with the first step: If ##R_C = R_{//} + R_3 ## then it certainly is not so that ##\log R_C = \log R_{//} + \log R_3 ## !
And then the ##\Rightarrow## is also unjustified.

I suggest you try to find ##\Delta R_{//}## on its own...
Thanks a lot, dear BvU! I tried your suggestion and it worked! :smile:
Yes, I had a big mistake in my first attempt as you mentioned.

What do you mean by this:
And then the ##\Rightarrow## is also unjustified.
Is that because of my mistake in taking logarithms or it's generally not considered right to use in these equations?
 
Transition from first line in attachment to second line was in error.
The transition from before the ##\Rightarrow## to after was also in error, hence my remark.
$$\ln{R_1 R_2\over R_1+R_2} =\ln R_1+\ln R_2-\ln(R_1+R_2) $$
 
  • Like
Likes AdrianMachin
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 hanged 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