#### Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

**posted on**

August 17, 2006, 2:39 am

Hi:

If a conductor has zero resistance, then what is the amperage of a

current flowing though it?

Amperage = voltage/resistance

If the resistance is zero, then the amperage is something that math

cannot explain. Anything divided by zero is an "error" when calculated.

How to solve this puzzle?

Thanks,

Radium

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

On 16 Aug 2006 19:39:29 -0700, in message

Your assertion is incorrect. Anything divided by zero is a "pole" when

calculated.

Very simple. The resistance isn't zero in a conductor. Just in case any

of the children watching were wondering.

Please do try a little harder with your next pitch. The score is getting

out of hand, and mercy rules may soon apply.

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

On 16 Aug 2006 19:53:31 -0700, in message

No, I mean "pole." The definition of this is beyond the scope of the

group. Understanding poles requires a knowledge of the Calculus.

Well, yes, if you mean to apply the term to the calculation of values in

the solving of a circuit. In that case, then the phrase is flawed in the

respect that it is correct to say that the resistance

***approaches***zero,

and so may be ignored in the solving, such ignorance being indicated by

insertion of the value, zero, for the conductor bits.

KISS, nowaddumsayin? Or not?

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

On 16 Aug 2006 19:53:43 -0700, in message

Ah. Where to begin. <taps keyboard>. Well, let's keep it simple. There

is no such thing as zero resistance in a conductor. When solving a

circuit, we may ignore the impedance in the conductors if we are assured

that their actual electrical properties are of no significance to the

circuit. Thus, when solving for DC, it is acceptable to plug in the value

of "zero" for both voltage and resistance for all the conductor bits,

because their effect is insignificant.

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

The resistance of a super conductor is zero. The voltage drop is also zero

so 0/0 is still mathematically correct. A current once started in a zero

resistance loop will continue indefinitely without loss and without decay.

Such a thing does exist it's not science fiction.

Bob

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

Radium wrote:

Hi, R. In practice, no conductor has exactly zero ohms. There's

always some resistance.

Any voltage source is also imperfect, and has internal resistance to

"infinite" current.

If you place a copper busbar across the terminals of a fully charged

car battery (don't -- it will explode and give you an acid bath), you

will have hundreds or possibly even a couple thousand amps flowing, but

not an infinite number of amps. Short circuit current always is

finite.

Some of your difficulties might be cleared up by pulling a basic

electronics book from the library and glancing through it.

Good luck

Chris

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

***snip***

(jokingly)

Yeah, but then /I/ would have to do the same! Let me learn from his

ignorance!!!

Puckdropper

--

Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

"Radium"

******What you measure with an amp meter.

******Only where there IS a defined resistance with a defined voltage drop.

Otherwise:

Amperage = the flow of electrons in Coulombs per second.

1 amp = 6.24 exp18 electrons per second.

******BOLLOCKS.

******Get your basic definitions right.

........ Phil

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

Assuming an ideal zero-ohm conductor...

It depends on the other resistances in the circuit.

If you had an ideal voltage source, you'd have infinite current.

However, neither ideal zero ohm resistors nor ideal voltage sources

exist in nature (er, excepting superconductors, maybe). What you

actually end up with is a very high current, limited by (for example)

the battery's internal resistance, tiny wire resistance, etc.

If you had an ideal zero ohm conductor in an otherwise normal circuit,

you end up with zero volts across it. The other components have all

the voltage across them, and they limit current.

Even if you just shorted a battery, the battery itself has an internal

resistance, which limits the amount of current it can push. At its

limit, you have a huge amount of current through the conductor, and a

tiny (for real conductors) or zero (for ideal zero ohm conductors)

voltage drop across the conductor.

In this case, you're using the wrong equation anyway. The amperage is

limited by the battery, so you want the V = I * R equation. R is

zero, so no value of I (short of infinity) causes a non-zero voltage

drop across the ideal conductor.

Multiplying by zero is mathematically well-defined. What you can't do

is, given a zero ohm conductor and non-zero amps, determine how much

voltage had been applied. All you can tell is that it's non-zero,

unless you allow for pre-existing currents (like in a superconducting

loop).

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

Yes, but E=IR, so if you have no resistance (R) then the voltage (E) =

zero and the current (I) is undefined since I=E/R and if E and R are

both zero, the current (I) can be a very large number, since 0/0 =

infinity. So what is the current in that case?

Another thought is the current and voltage in a LC tank circuit. If the

current reaches a peak at the same time the voltage goes to zero, and

visa versa, what is the current in the LC circuit when the voltage is

zero?

-Bill

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

To work with circuits like this, you have to use complex numbers for

volts, current, and "resistance". That lets you have sinusoidal

voltages and currents that are out of phase with each other, and still

be able to do the math sanely.

In your example, the peak current depends on the peak voltage, and the

L and C values. If the tank is driven, it also depends on the

frequency of the driving source.

Re: Zero Ohms = Mathematically Incorrect

Isn't it still ohm's law?. For a parallel LC circuit, the reactance of

a super conducting 1 Henry inductor at 1 Hertz will be XL= WL or 6.28

ohms and therefore the peak voltage across the parallel LC circuit will

be 6.28 volts when the peak current is 1 amp, just not at the same

time?

Something like that?

-Bill

#### Site Timeline

- » Trouble With A Very Simple MOSFET Amplifier
- — Next thread in » Hobby Electronics Basics

- » Current measurements from a computer
- — Previous thread in » Hobby Electronics Basics

- » Original Equipment Needs To Shut Down Or Alert If the Circuitry Is Altered In Any Way
- — Newest thread in » Hobby Electronics Basics

- » OT: Electronic Design!
- — The site's Newest Thread. Posted in » Electronics Design

- » Re: Problem with LXI 934.53735190 camcorder
- — The site's Last Updated Thread. Posted in » Electronics Repair