RC circuit - Capacitor discharge

AI Thread Summary
When a capacitor discharges, the potential difference across its plates equals that across the resistor. The equation governing this process is derived from Kirchhoff's Second Law, which states that the sum of voltages in a closed loop must equal zero. The correct expression for charge over time is q(t) = Q_0 exp(-t/RC), indicating the need for a negative sign in the original equation. The discussion highlights that during discharge, dq/dt is negative, leading to a contradiction if not properly accounted for. Understanding these principles is crucial for accurately analyzing RC circuits.
jpas
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
When a capacitor discharges, the potential difference between its plates and the resistor's terminals is the same. Hence,

\frac{Q}{C}=R \frac{dq}{dt}
Solving this equation we get

q(t)= Q_{0} exp \frac{t}{RC}

Obviously, this isn't the solution. It is actually q(t)= Q_0 exp \frac{-t}{RC}. So, I'm missing a minus sign on the original equation.

But why should it be there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to Kirchoff's Second Law, the sum of the voltages is equal to zero. R(dQ/dt) + (Q/C) = 0, therefore you need -R(dQ/dt) = (Q/C). I apologize for the lack of proper script.
 
Thank you.
Didn't know such laws.
 
If the capacitor discharges, then dq/dt is negative, so according toyour originial equation, Q/C which is positive equals something negative
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top