anonymous
  • anonymous
Can anyone tell me what junctions, branches, as well as loops are in physics given the following diagram? Thanks so much!
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
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.
jamiebookeater
  • jamiebookeater
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
uploading pic in a moment
anonymous
  • anonymous
1 Attachment
anonymous
  • anonymous
@hartnn

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
im confused do you want like a paragraph on junctions branches and loops?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I'd like to know the exact difference between junctions, branches and loops reflecting on the diagram uploaded.
anonymous
  • anonymous
if that's not too much to ask
anonymous
  • anonymous
alright give me a second watching a video on it
anonymous
  • anonymous
I can hear kirchoof's theory in the background
anonymous
  • anonymous
Yeah you bet it's based on Kirchoff's theory
anonymous
  • anonymous
Those terms are not often used so I am a little confused on my stance .
anonymous
  • anonymous
god damn it this would be easier about 2 years ago for me before i joined the army lol
anonymous
  • anonymous
They are basically the same as graph theory in mathematics. You need to redraw the diagram in familiar terms
anonymous
  • anonymous
start with the battery. Junctions are indicated by dots
anonymous
  • anonymous
This is quite a complex concept
anonymous
  • anonymous
what makes this complicated is that there is not one circuit, but two parts to this circuit
anonymous
  • anonymous
Exactly. This is not "according to the textbook" problem you need to improvise with certain degree of flexibility.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Lets redraw the circuit then
anonymous
  • anonymous
Seems to take a lot of time indeed.
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1439457954742:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Look at that all you have done is moved pellet!
anonymous
  • anonymous
Haha, openstudy converted the word S**T to pellet how interesting!
anonymous
  • anonymous
You did
anonymous
  • anonymous
Now, as I am sure mate you are aware what you have is a parralel cct
anonymous
  • anonymous
Yes but how's that gonna help us?
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1439458488882:dw| ~how many junctions here? i.e. that divide the current?
anonymous
  • anonymous
3
anonymous
  • anonymous
cool so , now that we have rearranged your diagram, how many junctions do you think there are (i.e where the current flows in separate routes)?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I think the same all 3
anonymous
  • anonymous
correct
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1439458868529:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Thanks so much! What about the loops and the branches? They are kind of complicated
anonymous
  • anonymous
eliminate c, A F and G from the diagram, they are only there to confuse, that is what makes it a problem
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1439459168787:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Now you have rather a simple parallel circuit
anonymous
  • anonymous
the only problem is that bottom line! in particular that resistor between the two batteries. One solution is Combine the batteries into one battery, and let the resistor in the middle be a series resistor
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1439459546804:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
So what's your final take on this?
anonymous
  • anonymous
redrawing this cct you now have: |dw:1439459727008:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Looks like the major thing seems to be BH
anonymous
  • anonymous
Therefore B and H seem to be the ones so called "branches"?
anonymous
  • anonymous
It's amazing how Physics scientize words from our daily speechXD
anonymous
  • anonymous
It's actually Physics adopting our conversational English as being scientific
anonymous
  • anonymous
here is my final analysis: there are 2 loops between AB and AD. There are 3 branches (where current goes) B to A B to C and B to D. I can only see two loops for the current ( between the batteries) from 10V battery to 10V battery and from 80V battery to 80V battery.
anonymous
  • anonymous
This is totally cool my friend. reverse engineeringXD
anonymous
  • anonymous
I wish physics brings us more practicality like wormhole and time travelXD
anonymous
  • anonymous
Juntions? this is where the current splits off, again kirchoff's theory reduces this, as I have. I would say there is only one junction (B) which splits the current
anonymous
  • anonymous
lot of guys her very good at theoretical maths, unfortunately they not very good at applications
anonymous
  • anonymous
True. They like mental stimulation without being practical
anonymous
  • anonymous
you know that's a classy self cerebral stimulation right XD
anonymous
  • anonymous
I guess I am one of them( I mean I corrected my physics lecturer who said that a capacitor was charged in 2/3 of the time--> I showed mathematically it was never charged), so cant really say anything bad about them
anonymous
  • anonymous
Physics is contaminated with intuitive reasoning and lack of mathematical justifications.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Physicists in general are lackadaisical about numerical computations and they rely mostly on fully comprehensible concepts which are the foundations of our reasoning. If you know what I mean..
anonymous
  • anonymous
ah, we need intuition as well
anonymous
  • anonymous
Sad fact is physicists estimate from intuition too much. However I do believe physics is the fundamental science that aids us in understanding as well as becoming logical of our self. Too many people reason terribly due to naivety in fundamental logics. I mean you see those people everywhere making absurd claims of how an ideal person should be without knowing all the philosophical as well as physical concepts behind them. They say experience automatically makes one wise but that's a big no no. Understanding of physics and maths makes him wise and not the sole activity of existing without much mental venture.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I personally believe education should be catered to physics and less on tireless root memorization which relies of obsessive tendency of people to actually repeat them over and over without being conscious of the methodical learning.
anonymous
  • anonymous
If you understand physics everything else (being able to read/write/articulate/reason/justify/argue/) secondary because the nature of this subject necessitates them.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Take for example when we do physics our attention is applied to the profoundly complex thought which necessitates automatization of other foundational academic skills whose process of mastery is wasted over years after years when in fact understanding of physics fixes all these problems in light speed. Education other than math/physics is a mere means to demonstrate your stupidity in the studies of public service.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.