Talk:Kirchhoff's circuit laws
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
uhh. wow physics is great, but whatever happened to Es = Er1 = Er2 = Er3 where total voltage equals the same voltage across all branches of a parallel circuit. Why must you make this all greek like?
Contents |
[edit] This article needs some work
The vector calculus expressions are necessary, but a simpler, more practical explanation of the laws should also be included.
Also the copyright notices on the images are distracting and unnecessary in my opinion.
[edit] The Second Law is a myth, a slang
The fact that the so called "second law" is considered a Law is one of the best known anecdotes in elecronics. The second law is nothing more and nothing less than one particular interpretation of purely _arithmetical_ relation. Take a loop (a circuit in this case), assign an arbitrary value to each vertex in the loop (voltage in this case) and then calculate the directed sum of the differences between adjacent vertices in the loop. You will always get 0 as the result. The very same result will be obtained with sheep, apples, dollars or demons at the vertices of the loop (instead of volts). This happens becuase 'a - a' is always 0 regardless of the value of 'a'. If you wan't to call it a "law", you can, but it is still an abstract, purely arithmetical law, which in its essense has absolutely nothing to do with electronics, conservation of energy or something like that.
Referring to the physical interpretation of that arithmetical law as a Second Kirchhoff's Law is popular _slang_ among electronics engineers, but formally it is incorrect to call it a physical law. From the formal point of view, it is OK to refer to it as a _rule_, but not as a "law". And, once again, to say that it follows from the laws of energy conservation makes no sense. What it does follow from are the basic axioms of arithmetics. The latter forms the basis for the formal description of any physical laws and, therefore, _predates_ them, not follows from them.
[edit] copyright notices on images
the copyright notices on the images detract from the professional look of the article. Why not remove its presumably that is allowable under the terms of the GFDL under which it is licensed.--86.17.153.108 16:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Voltage around a loop
I think the two laws/rules for electrical are not separable. I think that summing the voltages around a loop equals zero is ok because it is one of the principles that defines or proves the current as being in a loop. I prefer to tell students that the summ of the voltage drops around a loop will equal the magnitude of the voltage supplied. Which in the context of a technician is a little more practical Frankenstien 23:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
