Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (64487)	11/28/2001 10:15:23 AM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Bill, OK, I get stuck on the concept that a gradient is a gradient no matter what is in there. make it thinner and the volts per mil goes up. At some point that will punch through. No matter how you extend the capacitor in the xy direction and thus make the capacity larger the gradient stays the same. Same for the filling in the capacitor sandwich. better filling makes more capacity and thus more stored charge, but the gradient betwen the spatially fixed plates is the same. Move them apart and the gradient falls. There's nothing wrong with you logic. How would you explain no change in the strength of the field between plates if the charge on them has increased -- assuming you've used a higher-k and kept the separation the same? The gradient is scaled by the permittivity. Pravin.