Why does current lag behind voltage in inductor?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the phenomenon of current lagging behind voltage in inductors, particularly in the context of alternating current (AC) circuits. Participants explore the underlying principles, intuitive explanations, and mathematical relationships involved in this behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a desire for a more intuitive understanding of why current lags behind voltage in inductors, despite being familiar with the formulas.
  • One participant explains that inductors resist changes in current, and when voltage is applied, the induced magnetic field creates an opposing electric field that causes the current to lag.
  • Another participant references Lenz's law, stating that the induced current opposes the change causing it, leading to a phase difference where voltage leads current by 90 degrees in ideal inductors.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of induced current and whether it pushes back against the original current, with questions about the constancy of voltage across the inductor.
  • One participant notes that the concept of current lag is specific to AC circuits and may not apply to other voltage variations, suggesting that the lag is a special case rather than a universal principle.
  • Another participant introduces the concepts of active and reactive resistance, seeking clarification on the nature of reactive components in circuits.
  • Participants discuss the relationship between voltage and the rate of change of current in inductors, emphasizing the independence of voltage and current in this context.
  • There is a mention of the phase relationship in capacitors, where current leads voltage, prompting further inquiry into the differences between inductors and capacitors in AC circuits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of current lagging behind voltage, with some agreeing on the explanations involving Lenz's law and phase relationships, while others question the applicability of these concepts to different types of voltage variations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications of these principles beyond AC circuits.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of their arguments on specific definitions and contexts, such as the distinction between AC and other voltage types. There are also unresolved questions about the nature of reactive resistance and its implications in circuit analysis.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in electrical engineering, physics, and related fields who are exploring the behavior of inductors and capacitors in AC circuits.

  • #91
jim hardy said:
what an interesting couple pages.

i'm not anti-math but am sympathetic toward those who struggle with it.

being mildly autistic, my awkwardness made math more difficult for me than it should have been. simple arithmetic mistakes scuttled many a calculus problem that i'd set up correctly but blew the evaluating part from a dropped sign or something.

result is i am real skeptical of formulas unless i can "feel" them.

when you're as dumb as me you have to work twice as hard as normal people and that's why i try to explain things simply - if it keeps somebody from giving up it's worthwhile.

for anybody stuggling with concept behind operator j ;
here's what i decided felt right:
multiplying by operator j shifts phase 90 degrees
multiplying twice shifts you 180 degrees,
which is exactly same as multiplying by -1
so obviously j is sqrt(-1) , for when you multiply it by itself you get -1 and that's a square root.
And of course it's imaginary because everybody knows negative numbers don't have square roots.

works for me. I'm no Euler.
but i learn from most everybody i meet.
great discussion guys , thanks.

old jim

Well you are "dumb" as I am. Because I can only work with formulas if I can "feel" them too. Mathematical and physical ones, both I have to "feel".
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #92
I'm not sure I have ever needed to "feel" math...just understand it.

To me math has come easy...but I certainly "feel" for those who trouble with it.

In alegebra there is one basic rule..."what you do to one side of the equation...you do to the other side".

That and there are only two things you can do in math...add or multiply.

Subtracting is addition of the opposite...division is multipication of the reciprical.

And yes, there are a ton of little rules, but the above is pretty much the basics...I "feel".
 
  • #93
'multiply' is just a series of additions, in any case.
But ordinary arithmetic rules are not used in all maths - so there is a tiny bit more to it. :cool:
 
  • #94
I agree.

You can certainly go far with the basics I mentioned...differetial equations, calc 3 and so on.

But yes...it is a bit more complicated.

And actually the math is simple eventually...learning how to set up the problems in real life...or in story problems is the trick.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K