Win Hill: Inverse Marx Generator ??

is

No

=3D Q.

Each of the two 2F caps each with 1 coulomb of charge will be discharged simultaneously. So even though just 1 Coulomb will flow through the external circuit it is used twice.

Maybe you should not think about charge but about the voltage on a capacitor being the integral of the current over time. Then you would see that on all of the circuits you have described that the "Charge is conserved" mantra is essentially true

In the case of the two or three component systems you have been describing (two caps or two caps with another component between them) all of the current from one of the capacitors flows into the other capacitor with none going anywhere else. In that scenario the integral of the current out of one is equal to the integral of the current flowing into the other. So whatever charge one loses, the other gains.

kevin

I'm an engineer. I design circuits. Philosophy is useless to me unless it allows me to quantify and measure things and predict what the numbers will mean.

Take two caps. C1 is 1 farad, charged to 1 volt. C2 is 2 farads, zero volts. C1 stores 1 coulomb, C2 has zero.

Connect a 1 henry inductor across C1 until its voltage is zero. All the energy has been transferred to the L. Now use the energy in L to charge C2, and disconnect it when the current decays to zero. All the energy that used to be in C1 is now in C2. C2 is now at 0.707 volts, and it holds 1.414 coulombs of charge.

Even simpler: calculate the coulombs stored in (eg, ampere-seconds removable from) four identical charged caps in parallel. Now rearrange them in series to form a 2-terminal capacitor. Recalculate the coulombs available for extraction.

Or: start with identical charged caps in parallel. Compute Q of the parallel combo. Disconnect them and reconnect with opposed polarity. Recompute Q.

That's what "conservation of charge" means in my world: things I can calculate, measure, and use. Sometimes I can count on conservation of charge, sometimes I can't. I can always count on conservation of energy.

John

Used twice? What does that mean? What meter would measure the "used twice" current waveform?

Obviously true, if you're only allowed to connect them with a series impedance. But that's a special case, not the only one I have suggested.

John

Yea, this is what good soldier Schweik used to say:

"When a car runs out of gas, it stops. Even after been faced with this obvious fact, they dare to talk about momentum".

Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant

If Schweik has emptied the clip of his machine gun into you, you mostly likely would have died, and his philosophy would have worked better than yours.

As an engineer, I use the theories that involve measurable phenomena and subsequently make electronics work, and avoid the ones that don't.

John

The philosophy can't stop a bullet, however it helps staying away from the places where the bullets are whistling.

As an engineer, you should know that machine guns don't use clips.

VLV

"John Larkin" wrote in = message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

The other coulomb was there because it was in parallel. Charge is = conserved _in series circuits_, and obeys a law otherwise (Kirchoff). = Putting them in parallel, Kirchoff says one plus one makes two. In = series, one equals one.

So where did you think the charge went? ;)

Tim

--=20 Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk. Website:

Not the same "sloshing" circuit you first presented. No surprise. You never actually answer any question. You should be in politics and sell global warming ;-)

BTW, How did you create charge in a closed system? ...Jim Thompson

And they absolutely, positively refuse to pull out a map.

GPS allowed them to go back to being lazy all over again.

Bwuahahahahaha! Sure ya do...

_in series circuits_, and obeys a law otherwise (Kirchoff). Putting them in parallel, Kirchoff says one plus one makes two. In series, one equals one.

In a simplistic series circuit the current-time history is the same for all parts in the loop. Handy word, "duh."

To summarize,

I used 12e18 electrons to charge up the 4F cap. After rearranging things into the 1 uF configuration, I can only recover 6e18 electrons. I destroyed 6e18 electrons!

John

If you start with the fallacy that "visible" energy is what is conserved, connecting just two capacitors with a switch together gains charge. Try it. It's akin to the old 2=1 Algebra "proof"... You'll get Qfinal = sqrt(2)*Qinitial :-)

"Its the old 'where did the energy go' two cap puzzle" is correctly solved by conservation of charge. Taking the switch resistance to a limit of zero Ohms allows the student to see what is happening.

This is Larkin's folly.

He's ignorant, but he's even more stubborn.

Win won't exhibit his competency by jumping in here and correcting Larkin's folly... it would be politically incorrect for Win to admit that I'm right :-) ...Jim Thompson

Larkin flops as usual, but he'll never admit he's "AlwaysWrong" in entrepreneur disguise ;-) ...Jim Thompson

Indeed!! ...Jim Thompson

_in series circuits_, and obeys a law otherwise (Kirchoff). Putting them in parallel, Kirchoff says one plus one makes two. In series, one equals one.

John, Are you really incapable of admitting error? What happens when you ship something that doesn't quite perform to spec? Go hide and let the troops take the gas? Naaaah! You'll probably claim it's never happened. Just like the charge you "destroyed". ...Jim Thompson

Make a technical contribution once in a while, instead of clucking and whining. Maybe even - gasp - something original.

John