Open study

is now brainly

With Brainly you can:

  • Get homework help from millions of students and moderators
  • Learn how to solve problems with step-by-step explanations
  • Share your knowledge and earn points by helping other students
  • Learn anywhere, anytime with the Brainly app!

A community for students.


I got my questions answered at in under 10 minutes. Go to now for free help!
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly


Get your free account and access expert answers to this and thousands of other questions

@UnkleRhaukus My first time doing a circuit problem Let's see how much I know....
should I "add" \(C_1 \;\text{and}\; C_2\) first?

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

|dw:1362324461114:dw| these are in they're in series correct?
|dw:1362324513695:dw| is my charge distribution correct so far?
is it true that the part circled doesn't have a charge? or a net charge of zero?|dw:1362324758141:dw|
does that mean \(Q_1 \ne Q_2\)
This is physics
I'll move my question
|dw:1362325488170:dw| Series
so \(C_1=C_2\)
I don't think you can say that they're equal
are the charges equal? \[Q_1=Q_2\] |dw:1362325598105:dw|
or should they be opposite in sign?
The sign is correct
is it true that these two plates don't have a net charge? There is something special about these two plates, but I don't remember what it is. |dw:1362325688912:dw|
\[C_1=\frac{Q_1}{V_1}\] \[C_2=\frac{Q_2}{V_2}\] so far \(Q_1=Q_2\) the that the potential across these plates? |dw:1362325884681:dw|
|dw:1362325984158:dw| The potential is probably different between \[C_1 & C_2\]
The charges must be the same, otherwise they won't come up with a formula for seires: \[V=V_1+V_2\\\ \\ \text{From} Q=CV \\ \\ \frac{Q}{C}=\frac{Q}{C_1}+\frac{Q}{C_2} \\ \\ \frac{1}{C}=\frac{1}{C_1}+\frac{1}{C_2} \]
makes sense. Does this mean that the Potential difference between (parallel plates 1) and (parallel plates 2) is \(\frac 1 C\) where \(\frac 1 C =\frac 1{C_1}+\frac 1{C_2}\)
I mean it makes sense mathematically, I'm trying to conceptually understand it
That C you're calculating is actually here|dw:1362326867484:dw| Then, You have to combine with C3 with C, which is in parallel, Just add them and you'll get the total capacitance for the top part without C4, as for C4 just use the formula 1/C... again
I have access to the answer. I'm trying to recreate an example by Prof. Walter Lewin....unfortunately I've been very unsuccessful so far :(
so my goal is to have C4 and C3 and (C_2 and C_1) in parallel....and the only way to do it is to combine the series C_2 and C_1 We've come to the conclusion that C_1 and C_2=\[\frac 1 C\] and Now I'm adding \[\frac 1 C +C_3+C_4=C_{net}?\]
Let's see....
are \[\frac 1 C+C_3=\text{to some other C}\] since they're within the same enclosed circuit
Don't do them together, that's the biggest mistake you can do in circuit problems. For "All the capacitors" in series, remember that Voltages always add up, so: \[V_{Total}=V_1+V_2+V_3\\\ \\ \text{From} Q=CV \\ \\ V=\frac{Q}{C} \\ \\ \frac{Q}{C}=\frac{Q}{C_1}+\frac{Q}{C_2}+\frac{Q}{C_3} \\ \\ \frac{1}{C}=\frac{1}{C_1}+\frac{1}{C_2}+\frac{1}{C_3}\] For "All the capacitors" in parallel, Voltages in Parallel are equal, \[V=V_1=V_2\] So, \[C=C_1+C_2\]
but why are \[C_1, C_2 \;\text{and}\; C_3\] in series? I agree that C_1 and C_2 are, but wouldn't the addition of C_1 and C_2 be in parallel to C_3
oh I're just giving me a general statement...sorry :S
so yes, for "all the capacitors in series" the Voltages add up
Yes so for C1 and C2 we have \[ \frac{1}{C}=\frac{1}{C_1}+\frac{1}{C_2}\] \[C=\frac{C_1 C_2}{C_1+C_2}\] Now we have parallel, |dw:1362328161892:dw| Then, \[C_{T}=C+C_3 \\ \\ C_{T}=\frac{C_1 C_2}{C_1+C_2}+C_3\]
Then we reduced the circuit into |dw:1362328321279:dw| Series, \[C_{Total}=\frac{1}{C_T}+\frac{1}{C_4} \\ \\ C_{Total}=\frac{1}{\frac{C_1 C_2}{C_1+C_2}+C_3}+\frac{1}{C_4}\]
Whops, that should be \[\frac{1}{C_{Total}}=\frac{1}{C_T}+\frac{1}{C_4} \\ \\ \frac{1}{C_{Total}}=\frac{1}{\frac{C_1 C_2}{C_1+C_2}+C_3}+\frac{1}{C_4}\]
ok I've been able to follow you up to the point where \[C_T=C+C_3\] \[C_T=\frac{C_1C_2}{C_2+C_1}+C_3\] that means that... |dw:1362328737355:dw| does that mean that \(C_T\) and \(C_4\) are in parallel? does that mean that \(V=V_T+V_4\) does not apply anymore because it's not in series anymore? or is that always true...whether we're working with capacitors in parallel or in series?
wait....are C_T and C_4 in parallel? If we line them up it looks like they're in series |dw:1362329073958:dw|
oh that's why we're able to say \[\frac 1 {C_{Total}}=\frac 1{C_T}+\frac 1{C_4}\] \[\frac 1 {C_{Total}}=\frac{1}{\frac{C_1C_2}{C_2+C_1}+C_3}\] Ok I think I'm following
That's series, there's no obvious branching lines.
oops I forgot something
\[\frac 1 {C_{Total}}=\frac{1}{\frac{C_1C_2}{C_2+C_1}+C_3}+\frac{1}{C_4}\]
did we just achieve the goal of this problem? Is that it?
why do you have C_Total instead of 1/C_total?
The final answer should be\[\frac{1}{C_{Total}}=\frac{1}{\frac{C_1 C_2}{C_1+C_2}+C_3}+\frac{1}{C_4}\] But then, I usually work out the numbers first then substitute into another equation that way is not so confusing :)
1 Attachment
oh I see....
one more question |dw:1362329932879:dw| would this be a parallel series?
You need to know where's the power coming from..
that's the power right?
Series, you can ignore that middle line|dw:1362330096032:dw|
can you draw capacitors in parallel for me
Lets say there's another capacitor there |dw:1362330161795:dw| Then, You can tell C_T and C_4 is in series, but both C_T and C_4 is in parallel with C_5 So u work out the series for C_T and C_4 first, then parallel for C_5
oh so does parallel mean parallel to the power supply?
|dw:1362330342861:dw| C_5 and C_6 would be capacitors in parallel , whereas C_T and C_3 are capacitors in series correct?
I mean C_T and C_4....typo :S
no, just look at the branching first, C_T , C_6, and C_4 is in series because they're in the same line, Then C_5 is the only one parallel to all of the other 3 capacitors, you're actually relating to other capacitors
oh I see.... so for capacitors in parallel \[V=V_1+V_2\] still holds, correct? but the Q's are not equal?
Parallel capacitors is \[V=V_1=V_2\]
oh interesting Let's see \[V=\frac Q C\] \[\frac Q C=\frac{Q_1}{C_1}=\frac{Q_2}{C_2}\]
Q's the same again?
For Parallel, Q is not the same, but voltage is the same, so, example: \[Q=Q_1+Q_2+Q_3\] \[CV=C_1V+C_2V+C_3V\] \[C=C_1+C_2+C_3\]
That's in parallel, you have to remember.
Series= Charges equal Parallel= Voltage equal
Yes! Makes sense :)
You are awesome! Thank you soo much for teaching me capacitors in parallel and series...Thank You @.Sam.
hahaha, welcome :)

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question