|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
141.239.172.61
In Reply to: RE: I don't think a purist would say that.... posted by Lew on April 12, 2017 at 07:16:21
I would imagine it would be like a river that splits into 2 branches and forms up again further downstream. How else could that happen? I dont know the physics. Is there some other mechanism?
Follow Ups:
I think we're getting deep into theory here, and I have no training in this area, but my conception is that ALL of the signal goes through both capacitors, since the two capacitors are connected at both ends. True, in the real world, there will inevitably be tiny differences between any two of even the most closely matched capacitors; in my thesis the signal that emerges contains the average of the deviations from ideal manifest in each capacitor if taken separately. So, the same "problem" of paralleling capacitors still applies, whether you think of it my way or your way. Of course, there probably is a "right way", too.
In your thesis, what would make the signal divide? (I ask this for fun only, not because I know for sure.) Here's a thought experiment: If the signal were to divide, what happens to the voltage and current that characterize it?
The voltage potential is the same but half of the current flows through one cap and the other half of the current flows through the other cap.
So in theory the ESR is cut in half vs. one cap.
"...the signal that emerges contains the average of the deviations from ideal manifest in each capacitor if taken separately"
Yes.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
But this, I think, is a case where the water analogy falls apart. I don't think you could in theory put your finger on one electron and say that this one went through capacitor A and that one went through capacitor B. All the signal goes through both capacitors, is how I think of it. In fact, one might support that position by the observation that the capacitors in parallel provide a net additive capacitance across the whole signal. Somehow, the signal is in both capacitors at once.
"I don't think you could in theory put your finger on one electron and say that this one went through capacitor A and that one went through capacitor B."
And just to add another bit of fun to the discussion, electrons don't actually pass through the capacitor at all; that is to say they don't cross between the plates of the capacitor.
Chris
but I couldn't think of a better "unit of audio signal".
"but I couldn't think of a better "unit of audio signal"."
I know, and it was really just pure pedantry, but I couldn't resist!
Think of 2 resistors in parallel.Capacitors have reactance so that at any given frequency each cap has a reactance value.
The two caps in parallel will have one half of that reactance value just like 2 (equal value) resistors in parallel will have one half the value of one.
I don't see the water analogy falling apart but yes, the signal is in both capacitors at once but one cap is carrying half the current and the other cap is carrying the other half of the current.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 04/12/17
Can't know both position of particle (electron) and momentum (energy, frequency), at the same time.Some dude name Heisenberg figured that out in the 1920s.
8^)
Edits: 04/12/17
While we may not be able to pin down individual electrons, statistically, the net effects are quite predictable.
!
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
And due to physical variations beyond the control of the installer, it's likely there will be a phase difference of at least 1/billionth of a degree between the two signals. That's sure to ruin the sound. :)
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: