Solving Discharging Capacitor: Why εC in Denom.

  • Thread starter Thread starter iScience
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Capacitor
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the derivation of the equation for discharging a capacitor, specifically questioning the presence of εC in the denominator during integration. The confusion arises from the transition between indefinite and definite integrals, with the latter potentially omitting a constant of integration. The equations presented illustrate the relationship between charge (Q), capacitance (C), resistance (R), and voltage (ε) over time. The user seeks clarification on why the form of the integral leads to a denominator that seems inconsistent with standard integration practices. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the integration process in the context of capacitor discharge equations.
iScience
Messages
466
Reaction score
5
$$\epsilon=IR+V_C$$

$$\epsilon=IR+\frac{Q}{C}$$

$$\frac{dQ}{dt}=\frac{\epsilon-Q/C}{R}$$

$$\int\frac{dQ}{C\epsilon-Q}=\int\frac{dt}{RC}$$

$$-ln(\frac{\epsilon C-Q}{\epsilon C})=\frac{t}{RC}$$

in previous step I am confused as to why the εC is in the denominator.

if we have $$\int\frac{1}{x-2}dx$$

the answer is $$ln(x-2)$$

theres no denominator, so where is the one in the derivation popping up from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps the author used definite integrals, not indefinite integrals. Had he used the latter, there would have been a constant of integration, which seems to be missing from your equations.
 
##\frac{dQ}{Cε - Q} = \frac{dt}{RC}##
##\int^Q_{Q_0} \frac{dQ'}{Cε - Q'} = \int^t_{t_0} \frac{dt'}{RC}##
##ln|Cε - Q| - ln|Cε - Q_0| = \frac{t}{RC} - \frac{t_0}{RC}##
##ln(\frac{Cε - Q}{Cε - Q_0}) = \frac{t}{RC} - \frac{t_0}{RC}##

Q = 0 when t = 0
So you can set ##Q_0## and ##t_0## to 0.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top