Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

What does it mean (Capacitor)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks, I understand now.

Since you understand, I suggest you completely ignore attempts to cloud your understanding. Some on here will try to say the equation is wrong, blah, blah, it goes on and on. But I'm glad you understand, and feel free to ask me to clear up anything else at any time. There are lots of knowledgable, experienced people here, and I guarentee that nearly to a man, they will validate your understanding. So, don't fall for anyone who wants to counter it.

BTW, another way to write the equation I gave is this:

C=Q/V, where Q is the charge stroed in the capacitor, and is the same as I*T in the earlier euqation, and C is the capacitance in farads. This equation shows in a more simple way how the charge storing capacity is affected by the "farads" of the capacitor. If C on the left side is increased, then Q on the right side is increased proportionally to balance the equation. I.e. the more farads, the more change that can be stored for the same voltage.
 
Last edited:
First of all, the formula you glommed onto is ambiguous. V(capacitor) = 1/F*1mA*T can be interpreted wrongly as V(capacitor) = 1/(F*1mA*T), whereas it should be written as V(capacitor) = (1/F)*1mA*T .

Ok, thanks for the correction, but shouldn't it really then be V(capacitor) = ((1/F)*1mA)*T?

Second, a capacitor loses as much charge as it gains when a voltage is applied across its terminals. This makes its charge change zero for whatever voltage is applied to the capacitor. Whenever you see or hear of someone "charging" a capacitor, they are charging it with energy, not charge carriers (free electrons). In other words, they are "energizing" the capacitor. Do you understand that?

Yes

You first asked what the difference between two capacitors with different capacitance. A capacitor is a electrical energy storage element that stores energy in an electric field. A higher value capacitance is able to store more energy at the same voltage. The ability to store and release energy is handy for many electrical functions including filtering.

I probably could have articulated the question better because I was also interested in why different values were used, which I now understand.
 
Last edited:
TotalMadness said:
Ok, thanks for the correction, but shouldn't it really then be V(capacitor) = ((1/F)*1mA)*T?

It doesn't matter because multiplication is associative. The real proper way to write the equation unambiguously would be thus:


V(c)=(1mA*T)/F

Which is equivalent to the other equation I gave:

V(c)=Q/C
 
Last edited:
TotalMadness,

I found this video interesting:

If you like to watch a charlatan at work, then yes. He states that energy cannot pass through the insulating dielectric of a capacitor. That is just plain wrong. Charge cannot pass through the dielectric, but energy can do so via the electric field. Fields can pass through solid materials. The phenomena he is demonstrating is a well known physics principle called electrostatic induction. It is not "background ambient energy" like he says. How come he released this video clip with such poor sound? Who is this guy?

Ratch
 
Ratchit, as you have no idea who this man is, how do you know he is "a charlatan at work"? If he is a charlatan, so was Nikola Tesla; and lets not forget that other "out of the box" thinker, Galileo Galilei. Although my knowledge in this area at this time is limited, I have found that those who are free thinkers in this world are the ones that end up making it progress. Unlike yourself, I am not a text book jockey. I am also not interested in your agenda on this forum

As for "electrostatic induction", the same people that write this also believe that electrons travel through a wire.

In future, either make corrections when you are replying to my posts, or don't reply; I am not interested in your attacks on people.
 
TotalMadness,

Ratchit, as you have no idea who this man is, how do you know he is "a charlatan at work"?

Easy question to answer. By what he says. Did you hear what he said? He said that energy cannot travel from one plate of a capacitor to the other. That should tip you off.

If he is a charlatan, so was Nikola Tesla;

How can you say Tesla was a fraud? He studied at several presigious institutions, and was instrumental in developing AC power distribution. What has the crank in the film clip done? Who is he? He does not even give his name.

and lets not forget that other "out of the box" thinker, Galileo Galilei.

Like Tesla, Galileo backed up when he asserted. Even when it was inconvient for the Church to believe it.

Although my knowledge in this area at this time is limited,

You should learn to be more critical.

I have found that those who are free thinkers in this world are the ones that end up making it progress.

Only if they are correct in what they aver.

Unlike yourself, I am not a text book jockey

No educated person can be personally tutored on everything. Textbooks are ubiquitous and essential to gain knowledge.

I am also not interested in your agenda on this forum

What agenda is that?

As for "electrostatic induction", the same people that write this also believe that electrons travel through a wire.

I don't understand what you are saying. Electrostatic induction does not exist? Electrons do not travel through a wire? See YouTube - Electrostatic Induction

In future, either make corrections when you are replying to my posts, or don't reply; I am not interested in your attacks on people.

My "corrections" are stated above. Attacks and criticisms against fakers are valid. Can you find anything about "background ambient energy" in any valid reputable source? If you don't want your post answered, don't post it.

Ratch
 
Ratchit, you are now on my ignore list where you belong. I did not join this forum to see attacks on people or having to deal with disruptors like yourself in the threads I start.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

Back
Top