This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Consider a step-up transformer (the output voltage is greater than the input voltage). What happens ... (Read 86 times)

Brittanyd9008

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Consider a step-up transformer (the output voltage is greater than the input voltage). What happens to the current in the output side compared to the input side?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Research suggests that lead exposure leads to irremediable results, so that the best way to reduce lead levels is to remove lead-based materials. How realistic is such a tactic? Explain.
 
  What will be an ideal response?



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

aidanmbrowne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
Answer to Question 1

As was discussed in the answer to question 26, the output current would be less
than the input current in order to maintain the same magnetic field in the piece of iron (the
iron core) in the transformer. Alternatively, we noted in this chapter that
(VI)output = (VI)input.
Therefore, an increased output voltage (compared to the input voltage) means a reduced
output current (compared to the input current) in order to keep the product the same.

Answer to Question 2

The answer to this question depends on individual and political will. As a matter
of possibility, it is certainly possible to remove most lead from the environment. It becomes
a cost-benefit question.
It is very costly to remove lead-based paint from the environment because of the hazardous
nature of the material and the cost of wages of workers, and as of the present this relic of the
past is the primary cause of lead poisoning. Epidemiological studies of the effects of lead
seem uniformly to indicate it is less costly to remediate than to allow continued exposure of
children especially to lead's effects.
The United States mustered the political will in the mid-1980s to eliminate lead from
gasoline, and environmental concentrations declined. Europe followed suit, though much
later. In both cases, elimination of lead was delayed by the cost of the measures.
If there is a will to reduce the health costs of lead exposure (and every new study indicates
more deleterious effects of lead exposure), the elimination can be accomplished. Because
there are always competing priorities, accomplishing the cleanup will take concerted political
action and close attention to costs and benefits in making the arguments.




Brittanyd9008

  • Member
  • Posts: 500
Reply 2 on: Jul 28, 2018
Gracias!


Animal_Goddess

  • Member
  • Posts: 339
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
YES! Correct, THANKS for helping me on my review

 

Did you know?

To prove that stomach ulcers were caused by bacteria and not by stress, a researcher consumed an entire laboratory beaker full of bacterial culture. After this, he did indeed develop stomach ulcers, and won the Nobel Prize for his discovery.

Did you know?

Russia has the highest death rate from cardiovascular disease followed by the Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, and Poland.

Did you know?

Side effects from substance abuse include nausea, dehydration, reduced productivitiy, and dependence. Though these effects usually worsen over time, the constant need for the substance often overcomes rational thinking.

Did you know?

Normal urine is sterile. It contains fluids, salts, and waste products. It is free of bacteria, viruses, and fungi.

Did you know?

Excessive alcohol use costs the country approximately $235 billion every year.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library