Oh, I won't argue you on that. I definitely agree. But (and as you duly noted), you have to get pretty exaggerated to bring some of these "thought experiments" to potential relevance.I imagine many engineers have seen their design fall prey to unforeseen thermal effects which could be traced to temperature coefficients of resistance. It pays occasionally to keep such practical implications in mind - another thought experiment, perhaps.
I'M A GONNA SLAPPA YOU!Don't forget the fact that the filament is made of coiled tungsten, so there would also probably be some inductance to worry about....
Hi Elise,Apparently, a non-ohmic material has a nonlinear Current Voltage graph (in other words, it doesn't obey ohm's law, as you stated). An example of this would be a diode, as is a capacitor.
What???An inductor and a capacitor are linear components, but their V-I curves are non-linear. .
You can't go throwing in whatever caveats you need in order to narrow things down to somethign that would seem to meet your needs. You've thrown in two here. You first require that we only consider cases where the frequency is constant. You then require that we consider as our "voltage" and "current" the amplitude of a sinusoidal waveform.What???
If the frequency remains constant and you double the voltage across a capacitor, you think that the current will NOT be twice the initial value?
Is the following equation wrong?
I=V/Xc=jwC*V
Wrong. A device is linear if superposition holds. Period. It doesn't matter if it is steady state or fixed frequency or anything else.Edit: Regarding linearity, I think we need steady state conditions to proof if a device is linear or not - thus, the time dependence for other signals (differential quotient) cannot serve as an argument.
by Jeff Child
by Jeff Child
by Aaron Carman
by Jake Hertz