Introduction to Capacitors and Inductors

Introduction to properties of capacitors and inductors. Also, we explore how to combine them in series and parallel configurations.

[@RazorBird]

This video is underrated even after 3 years. thanks for making it!

[@thegarciab0y]

Rauer2341 Johan you're welcome!

[@feigenblatt]

In the formula for series capacitors you wrote +C3 instead of +1/C3 Otherwise I found the video very helpful, thank you.

[@justv1n]

You don't really have to add 1 in front of the + because it's basically understood as 1

[@jeromemedina4842]

@@justv1n No, they mean the fraction 1/C3 which makes a huge difference because simply C3 is not the same as 1/C3 (the faction 1 over C3)

[@SunahSnippets]

After 5 years , Better than my professor , THANKS !

[@MehmetSemercioglu]

You should keep making these lectures about electric. God bless you man.

[@UgliestKrane562]

really helped freshened my head for by gen test coming up thanks!!

[@sumitnarkhede.3105]

sir your exaplanation is very good.Thank you.

[@blowberry3369]

thank you so much

[@arepa420]

You're amazing 👏

[@jasonreed1352]

Due to a fundamental misperception of the movement of electric charge during the time that we can remember of our collective first studying electricity, the poles were actually mislabeled such that the electric current is actually from negative to positive. Given the absolute value of the math that is used to understand electricity as well as the absolute value of the work extractable from any given system is unchanged by this error, the fact that electron flow is actually from the anode to the cathode, which happen to have been mistakenly reverse-labeled to be possibly the only contradiction to the otherwise correct (outside of quantum theory, so in a more "classical" sense) saying: science always flows from highs to lows, the error per se is practically inconsequential. If not for a potential future consequence that may only be outside of our cognitive ability to even know how and that it can be looked for presently, my clarification might otherwise seem pedantic.

[@jillgates1340]

Not wrong, just more. Something missing.

[@jillgates1340]

And,?, so? Theres more.