Re: Ohm's Law

[Bob Sciamanda <trebor@VELOCITY.NET>]

When you derive the laws of series and parallel resistance combinations,
do you use this definition of resistance - I think you should.  Your Ohm's
law (about the constancy of R) says nothing apropo' to these
considerations.
Bob Sciamanda (W3NLV)
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (em)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Tarara" <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: Ohm's Law


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Sciamanda" <trebor@VELOCITY.NET>
>
> > Good point - I don't like it, but we do that with other definitions
(eg.,
> > it is kosher to regard one or more of Newtons "laws" as definitions).
> >
> > More importantly, if R= V/I is a statement that the resistance is
> > independent of voltage, where is the definition of resistance (R)?
>
> How about  R = rho(T)L/A?
>
> where rho is the temperature dependent resistivity of a material.
>
> Rick
>
> **********************************************
> Richard W. Tarara
> Professor of Physics
> Saint Mary's College
> Notre Dame, IN 46556
> rtarara@saintmarys.edu
>
> FREE PHYSICS INSTRUCTIONAL SOFTWARE
> www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
> PC and MAC software
> NEW! SIMLAB2001--DYNAMIC CARTS now available.
> CD-ROMs now available
> ******************************************************