*From*: "Martin G. Selbrede" <mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>*To*: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 07:52:09 -0500

`No, Phil, they ARE using farads. If you use a calculator, you'll see
``that the denominator should be 0.0314, which is 6.28 x 100 x 0.00005
``farads. I get the same answer they get, 31.8 ohms. They ARE
``incorporating the correct adjustment for the "micro" part of
``microfarads. You must be getting turned around somewhere in your
``calculating.
`

Martin On Sep 26, 2007, at 12:04 AM, philip madsen wrote:

Please tell me I aint nuts. I don't use formula often, so though Iinstinctively say reactance is I forget the application formicrofarads when the unit is Farad in this equation.Yet just look how this formula is applied in not one but twodifferent websites.. . Note they correctly state for this formula,C is capacitance in farads yet substitute microfarads into theequation. Isn't their answer wrong. shouldn't there be a 10^6 onthe top line.50 micro Farads = 50 x 10 to the -6th. Farads.Or am I just too old and missing something. Can a math man pleasecheck me out? I compute the answer should be 31,250 ohms. Philip.Quote,Now you can understand why it is said that the XC varies inverselywith the product of the frequency and capacitance. The formula is:Where: XC is capacitive reactance in ohms, f is frequency inHertz, C is capacitance in farads, p is 6.28 (2 X 3.1416) Thefollowing example problem illustrates the computation of X C.

-------- Martin G. Selbrede Chief Scientist Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. 8708 Technology Forest Place, Suite 100 The Woodlands, TX 77381

mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / martin.selbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxx

**References**:**[geocentrism] Re: Evolution***From:*Paul Deema

**[geocentrism] Re: Evolution***From:*Jack Lewis

**[geocentrism] modern edu***From:*philip madsen

- » [geocentrism] modern edu
- » [geocentrism] Re: modern edu
- » [geocentrism] Re: modern edu
- » [geocentrism] Re: modern edu
- » [geocentrism] Re: modern edu