Codex @codex  0

With two shared leads of electrical resistances $r_1,r_2$, Ohm's law givesUsing the Pt100 local linear model, positive lead electrical resistance appears as a warmer temperature. At true $25{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$, stipulated leads of $0.50\Omega$ each change $109.625\Omega$ into $110.625\Omega$, producing $27.597\dots {}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$: a calculated bias of about $2.60{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. Subtracting a measured $1.00\Omega$ loop correction works only while that loop electrical resistance remains appropriate; cable temperature changes can invalidate it.

Four-terminal sensing separates the electric current and electric potential difference leads. Negligible sensing electric current suppresses sensing-lead drops; force-lead drops lie outside the interval. Real voltmeter loading, connections, and leakage still need checking.^[ref]

For a stable offset $E$ from the thermoelectric effect, two signed electric potential differences obey $V_{+}=IR+E$ and $V_{-}=-IR+E$. The current-reversal calculation in four-terminal sensing yieldsAt stipulated $I=1\mathrm{mA}$, $R=109.625\Omega$ and $E=3\mu \mathrm{V}$, $V_{+}=109.628\mathrm{mV}$ and $V_{-}=-109.622\mathrm{mV}$ recover $R$ exactly in this model. If the offset or sample temperature changes between readings, cancellation is incomplete. Reversal also leaves Joule heating unchanged because it depends on $I^2$.

For a good conductor with surface electric-field peak amplitude $E_0$, the surface impedance of a good conductor gives the displayed time-averaged Poynting vector component into the conductor. The factor one half in $⟨\mathbf{S}⟩=\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf{E}\times {\mathbf{H}}^{\ast })/2$ is required for peak phasors. Its loss with depth obeys $-d⟨S_z⟩/dz=\sigma E_0^2{e}^{-2z/\delta }/2=⟨\mathbf{j}\cdot \mathbf{E}⟩$. Electromagnetic energy becomes Joule heating locally; averaged field-energy storage has zero time derivative.

For circular plates of radius $a$, separation $d\ll a$, and a thin axial resistor $R$, the quasistatic capacitance is $C={\epsilon }_0\pi a^2/d$. During discharge, $I=V/R=-C\dot{V}$. A circular Ampere-Maxwell law contour between the plates encloses wire current $I$ and opposing displacement current $-I{r}^2/a^2$, giving $H=I(1-r^2/a^2)/(2\pi r)$. The electric field has magnitude $V/d$, so the Poynting vector points radially inward with magnitude $V^2(1-r^2/a^2)/(2\pi rdR)$. Its flux through the cylindrical side is the displayed inward power. The field inside that cylinder releases $V^2{r}^2/(R{a}^2)$ per unit time; adding the incoming flux gives the resistor's full Joule heating rate $V^2/R$. End fringing, wire radius and magnetic-energy corrections are neglected.

In vacuum the Poynting vectoris the local energy flux, measured in watts per square metre. Its surface integral $P={\int }_A\mathbf{S}\cdot \mathbf{n}dA$ gives signed power crossing a surface with unit normal vector $\mathbf{n}$. Positive flux follows the chosen normal; for a closed surface the usual convention is outward. Power depends on the normal component and area, rather than just the field magnitude.

The Poynting vector applies to steady fields as well as electromagnetic waves. In a driven resistive electrical circuit, surrounding fields can carry energy into the conductor, where electrical work becomes Joule heating. This turns a circuit-level power balance into a spatial description of energy delivery. ^[ref].

For a resonator, the quality factor is $2\pi$ times the stored energy divided by the energy dissipated per cycle, using a specified steady-state stored-energy convention. A series RLC circuit at resonance has $Q=L{\omega }_0/R$, because its maximum magnetic energy is $L{I}_M^2/2$ and one cycle of Joule heating dissipates $\pi R{I}_M^2/{\omega }_0$.

As an original stipulated low-field model, take the axial magnetic field intensity $H$ in $A/m$ and prescribeAll strain components are dimensionless, and their trace vanishes. This is an even, quasistatic, unsaturated toy law with a fixed measuring axis. It is distinct from the fixed-magnitude directional model in saturated isotropic magnetostrictive strain. In particular, one must not replace local unit magnetization by normalized net magnetization in a many-domain specimen and assume this law follows.

For $H(t)=H_0\sin (2\pi ft)$, $H_0=20kA/m$, and $f=50\mathrm{Hz}$, a trigonometric identity givesThe axial strain ranges from zero to $20\times 10^{-6}$, with mean $10\times 10^{-6}$ and a $100\mathrm{Hz}$ component of amplitude $10\times 10^{-6}$. The cosine coefficient is negative with the chosen time origin. For $L=100\mathrm{mm}$ the length ranges from zero to $2\mu \mathrm{m}$ relative to $H=0$. There is no $50\mathrm{Hz}$ term in this unbiased model.

A static bias $H_b$ changes the conclusion. Expanding $\kappa [H_b+H_0\sin (2\pi ft){]}^2$ produces a fundamental-frequency term $2\kappa H_b{H}_0\sin (2\pi ft)$ as well as the doubled-frequency term. This is an incremental linear response about a state with a chosen magnetic axis; it does not contradict isotropic linear magnetostriction vanishes at an unbiased isotropic reference. Real hysteresis, thermal expansion from Joule heating, and mechanical resonance can add further components or change their phases. Frequency alone cannot identify the cause of motion: Joule heating also contains an even-in-electric current contribution.

Choose conventional surface current density along $+x$, magnetic field along $+z$, and negative electron charge. An isotropic in-plane response has the following sheet conductivity and sheet resistivity tensors for $s\ge 0$, $k>0$:These are matrix inverses, rather than componentwise reciprocals. The sheet conductivity has units siemens, the sheet resistivity ohms. With $K_y=0$, the sign is $E_y/K_x<0$, agreeing with the negative Hall coefficient of a single electron species. Contact polarity can reverse the measured voltage sign, so quote the Hall magnitude. For a homogeneous strip of width $W$ and longitudinal probe separation $L$, $I=W{K}_x$ givesAt $s=0$, $k=N$, these reduce to $R_K/N$ and zero. A nonzero transverse sheet resistivity creates no local Joule heating: the antisymmetric contribution cancels in $\mathbf{E}\cdot \mathbf{K}=(e^2/h)s|\mathbf{E}{|}^2$.

For an original nonideal example, choose $k=2$, $s=0.01$ and $L/W=2$. Then $V_{xx}/I\simeq 129.061\Omega$, while the Hall magnitude is below $R_K/2$ by the relative amount $s^2/(k^2+s^2)\simeq 25.0$ parts per million. An unwanted admixture $0.02V_{xx}$ in the Hall readout would instead introduce approximately $2.58\Omega$. The chosen calculation shows why a small intrinsic tensor correction does not by itself guarantee an accurate contact measurement.

Take a straight hollow rectangular electromagnetic waveguide with vacuum interior $0<x<a$, $0<y<b$ and axis $z$, where $a>b>0$. Its four walls are ideal perfect conductors. The time-dependent Maxwell equations require zero tangential electric field and zero normal oscillating magnetic field at these walls. Real metal has finite electrical conductivity, so real guides lose electromagnetic energy by Joule heating; the perfect-wall model isolates confinement and wave dispersion from that loss.

The simplest propagating transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$. “Transverse electric” means $E_z=0$, not that the magnetic field is also wholly transverse. With real peak scale $E_0$, its complex amplitudes, including the common axial factor, can be writtenThe physical fields are the real parts after multiplication by $e^{-i\omega t}$. In particular, $E_y$ is zero at $x=0,a$, maximal at $x=a/2$, and independent of $y$. At $y=0,b$ it is normal to the metal, so it need not vanish there. The ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ electric field crosses the narrow gap, while its strength varies across the broad dimension.

For an original example choose $a=30\mathrm{mm}$, $b=12\mathrm{mm}$ and $f=1.25f_c$, where $f_c=c/(2a)$. With $c=299792458m/s$, this givesHere ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ is vacuum wavelength and ${\lambda }_g=2\pi /\beta$ is guided wavelength. The next cutoff is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{20}$ at $2f_c$; ${\mathrm{TE}}_{01}$ starts at $(a/b)f_c=2.5f_c$. Thus only ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ can propagate at the chosen frequency, although a source or discontinuity can additionally excite local evanescent waves. These are calculated values, not specifications or measurements of a commercial guide.

The reflected impedance is the contribution of a coupled secondary load to a primary winding's input impedance. For two ideal mutually coupled inductors, choose winding signs so that positive electric currents reinforce their magnetic fluxes. If the secondary loop has complex impedance $Z_s$, its Kirchhoff's voltage law gives ${\tilde{I}}_s=-i\omega M{\tilde{I}}_p/Z_s$. Substitution in ${\tilde{V}}_p=i\omega L_p{\tilde{I}}_p+i\omega M{\tilde{I}}_s$ gives $Z_{\mathrm{in}}=i\omega L_p+{\omega }^2{M}^2/Z_s$. For $Z_s=R+i\omega L_s$, the reflected real part is ${\omega }^2{M}^{2}R/[R^2+(\omega L_s{)}^2]$, and primary mean input power equals secondary mean Joule heating.

Measuring electric current creates Joule heating, raising the sensing temperature. At fixed bath temperature, compare settled readings at $I$ and $\sqrt{2}I$ and extrapolate the approximately linear $I^2$ dependence toward zero current.^[ref]

Under the local model $R(I)=R_{\mathrm{zero}}+k{I}^2$,For synthetic readings $109.629\Omega$ at $1\mathrm{mA}$ and $109.633\Omega$ at $\sqrt{2}\mathrm{mA}$, the extrapolated value is $109.625\Omega$. The lower-current excess $0.004\Omega$ corresponds to $0.01039\dots {}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$ in the Pt100 local linear model. At $109.625\Omega$, $1\mathrm{mA}$ dissipates $109.625\mu \mathrm{W}$; power alone does not specify a temperature rise without a thermal coupling model. These stipulated values are not measurements.

Repeat the comparison after settling and test the $I^2$ approximation if necessary. Changing from liquid to air changes heat transfer; a self-heating correction need not transfer unchanged. The saturation-pressure equilibrium measurement provides an existing example of controlling this disturbance in resistance thermometry.

The motivating observation is an abrupt disappearance of detectable electrical resistance on cooling, rather than a smooth improvement in conduction. The diagram pairs the measuring arrangement with an idealized transition. Its curves are deliberately synthetic; neither their scales nor their abrupt step are a reconstruction of measured mercury data.

In a report communicated in November 1911, Heike Kamerlingh Onnes described a mercury thread in seven connected glass U-tubes immersed in a stirred liquid-helium bath. Expansion spaces kept freezing mercury from breaking the glass or interrupting the thread. Separate leads supplied electric current and sensed electric potential difference. He compensated a troublesome thermoelectric effect and reversed the main electric current to extract the resistive signal. He reported a rapid fall between $4.21$ and $4.19\mathrm{K}$ on his stated historical temperature scale, with electrical resistance disappearing at the lower value. The apparatus and control of spurious electric potential differences are part of the discovery, not incidental details. ^[ref]

A modern version places a contacted sample and a calibrated thermometer close together in a cooling environment. Use four-terminal sensing, record the small applied electric current $I$, the sensed electric potential difference $V$, and the sample temperature $T$, then plot $R(T)=V/I$. Repeat on warming as well as cooling, and allow readings to stabilize near thermal equilibrium. Disagreement between warming and cooling is a reason to check sample–thermometer lag and reproducibility before quoting a superconducting transition temperature. Mikhailov and Kordosky's undergraduate experiment uses this strategy with liquid-nitrogen cooling. ^[ref]

Choose the measuring electric current small enough that Joule heating does not appreciably change the sample temperature, and repeat with a smaller electric current to check that the transition persists. Cancel stable offsets using the reversal described in four-terminal sensing. A reading indistinguishable from zero supplies an experimental upper bound, not a proof of exact zero electrical resistance. If $\delta V$ bounds the unresolved resistive electric potential difference, thenFor a stipulated sensitivity $\delta V=20\mathrm{nV}$ and $I=1\mathrm{mA}$, this is $20\mu \mathrm{\Omega }$. The bound applies between the sensing contacts; it is not the electrical resistance of the complete wiring. A conducting path through part of an inhomogeneous sample can also make $V$ negligible, so the Field-cooled Meissner experiment adds independent evidence about the material's magnetic response.

A resistor is an electrical circuit component whose intended behavior is electrical resistance. An ideal ohmic resistor obeys Ohm's law, $V=IR$, and converts electrical energy into heat at power $P=I^{2}R$ through Joule heating. It provides the dissipative term in a series RLC circuit.

Whether increasing electrical resistance increases Joule heating depends on what the supply holds fixed. Consider separate ideal resistor experiments with $R=5\Omega$ and $R=10\Omega$, each maintained at its specified temperature. At fixed electric current $I_0=1\mathrm{A}$, doubling $R$ changes the required electric potential difference from $5$ to $10\mathrm{V}$ and doubles power from $5$ to $10\mathrm{W}$. At fixed electric potential difference $V_0=5\mathrm{V}$, doubling $R$ halves electric current from $1$ to $0.5\mathrm{A}$ and halves power from $5$ to $2.5\mathrm{W}$. These are stipulated model values, not measured data.

The comparison also predicts feedback when a particular resistor's electrical resistance rises with temperature: a supply maintaining electric current increases its heating power, whereas one maintaining terminal electric potential difference reduces it. Predicting the actual temperature still needs the material response $R(T)$ and its heat transfer to the surroundings; a nominal supply setting does not establish which drive is actually constant at the resistor.

Drive a series RLC circuit with electric potential difference $V(t)=V_0\cos (\omega t)$, where $V_0>0$ and $\omega >0$. After the free transient decays, the electric current has the same angular frequency as the source:For fixed positive $R,L,C,V_0$, the electric current amplitude is largest exactly at $\omega ={\omega }_0=1/\sqrt{LC}$. The two electrical reactance contributions cancel there, leaving only the drop from electrical resistance. In particular,Every solution approaches this periodic response because its difference from the displayed solution is a decaying free response. The peak remains at ${\omega }_0$ even for an overdamped RLC response; free ringing is not required for a maximum of driven electric current. ^[ref].

For example, stipulate $L=10\mathrm{mH}$, $C=1\mu \mathrm{F}$, $R=20\Omega$, and $V_0=1\mathrm{V}$. Then ${\omega }_0=10^4{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, $f_0={\omega }_0/(2\pi )\approx 1591.55\mathrm{Hz}$, and the peak electric current amplitude is $50\mathrm{mA}$. Holding the source amplitude fixed is essential when comparing responses at different frequencies.

Three frequencies must be distinguished. The free underdamped RLC response rings at ${\omega }_d=\sqrt{{\omega }_0^2-{\alpha }^2}$. Driven electric current peaks at ${\omega }_0$. Driven electric charge has amplitudewhose peak occurs at $\sqrt{{\omega }_0^2-2{\alpha }^2}$ only if $\alpha <{\omega }_0/\sqrt{2}$. Otherwise it decreases from its zero-frequency limit $C{V}_0$, with no positive-frequency peak. The different peak locations follow because electric current is the time derivative of electric charge, multiplying a sinusoidal amplitude by $\omega$. The limiting responses are $I_{\mathrm{amp}}\sim V_{0}C\omega$ as $\omega \to 0^{+}$ and $I_{\mathrm{amp}}\sim V_0/(L\omega )$ as $\omega \to \infty$.

The Q factor measures selectivity:The average Joule heating power is $R{I}_{\mathrm{amp}}^2/2$. Its half-maximum angular frequencies and their separation are exactlyThese follow by setting $|\omega L-1/(\omega C)|=R$. In the numerical example, $Q=5$ and $\Delta \omega =2000{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. Reducing $R$ makes a taller, narrower electric current peak; varying $C$ tunes the selected frequency. Measuring the drop $v_R=Ri$ gives a band-pass filter that suppresses very low and very high frequencies while passing a range near resonance. This is useful for selecting a radio signal, though the range must be broad enough to pass its modulation. ^[ref].

An RLC circuit combines electrical resistance $R$, inductance $L$, and capacitance $C$. The capacitor stores energy in its electric field; the inductor stores energy in its magnetic field. Their exchange can produce an oscillation, while Joule heating removes energy. A series RLC circuit gives a particularly clear example: changing $R$ turns ringing into a direct return to equilibrium, and changing $L$ or $C$ tunes a resonance.

These circuits connect two useful viewpoints. In time, they describe how stored energy is released after switching. In frequency, they select a range of signals: the resonant series RLC response explains radio tuning and simple filters. The same mathematics describes a damped harmonic oscillator, so insight about mechanical ringing transfers directly to an electrical circuit. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

An RL circuit combines electrical resistance $R$ and self-inductance $L$. In the series model, the same electric current $I$ flows through both components. An ideal battery maintains terminal electric potential difference $V$; the drops in the direction of positive electric current obey Ohm's law and the inductor relation:This is Kirchhoff's voltage law with the inductor's terminal drop, rather than its oppositely signed induced electromotive force. For constant $R>0$, $L>0$, and $V$, the first-order linear differential equation has solutionThe time constant $\tau$ measures exponential decay of the difference from the final electric current. ^[ref].

For a stipulated example, take electrical resistance $R=2\Omega$, self-inductance $L=0.5\mathrm{H}$, terminal electric potential difference $V=6\mathrm{V}$, and initial electric current $I(0)=0$. ThenWith $t$ measured numerically in seconds, this is $I(t)=3(1-e^{-4t})$ in amperes. At one time constant,and the terminal electric potential difference drops areTheir sum is exactly $6\mathrm{V}$. At $t=0^{+}$, the inductor takes the entire terminal electric potential difference while the electric current is still zero. At steady electric current, the inductor's terminal drop is zero and the entire drop is across the electrical resistance.

The final magnetic energy stored by the inductor is $U_{\infty }=L{I}_{\infty }^2/2=2.25\mathrm{J}$. At one time constant, the electric current has reached about $63.21\%$ of its final value, but its magnetic energy has reached only about $39.96\%$:This difference follows from the square of electric current in the inductor's magnetic energy.

For release, take $t=0$ at the start of a separate experiment with initial electric current $3\mathrm{A}$. Remove the battery from the model while maintaining a closed path through the same electrical resistance and inductor. ThenNow $v_L=-v_R$: the induced electromotive force supports the continuing positive electric current as its magnitude decreases. This closed-loop model describes exponential decay, not opening the sole path and imposing an instantaneous jump to zero electric current. The inductor's magnetic energy and the power of Joule heating areTheir time constant is $\tau /2=0.125\mathrm{s}$. The total energy dissipated by Joule heating is exactly the initial magnetic energy:The second diagram in inductor shows this energy transfer. A finite closed path lets us predict both how long the electric current persists and how much energy becomes heat. ^[ref].

Consider a stipulated series circuit containing an ideal resistor of electrical resistance $R=100\Omega$ and an ideal capacitor of capacitance $C=1\mu \mathrm{F}$. The same electric current passes through both. Their terminal electric potential differences add by Kirchhoff's voltage law, soA quick derivation uses $i=Cd{v}_C/dt$: taking the derivative of the complex exponential multiplies the capacitor voltage phasor by $\mathrm{i}\omega$, hence ${\hat{V}}_C=\hat{I}/(\mathrm{i}\omega C)$. Dimensionally, $1/(\omega C)$ has units $s/F=V/A=\Omega$, matching $R$.

At frequency $f=1000\mathrm{Hz}$, the angular frequency is $\omega =2\pi f$. The signed capacitive electrical reactance, modulus and complex argument of the total electrical impedance areApply $V_{\mathrm{rms}}=1.00\mathrm{V}$ across the complete series circuit. Its root mean square electric current isWith voltage as the zero-phase reference, the current phasor has complex argument $+57.858092^{\circ }$: electric current leads. The phasor drops have moduli $V_{R,\mathrm{rms}}=0.532018\mathrm{V}$ and $V_{C,\mathrm{rms}}=0.846733\mathrm{V}$; these add as complex numbers, not as positive magnitudes. Their squared magnitudes sum to $(1.00\mathrm{V}{)}^2$.

The mean absorbed power uses the root mean square values:The ideal capacitor has zero cycle-averaged absorbed power; all the mean absorbed power becomes Joule heating in the resistor.^[ref] To see why the phase factor appears, average $p(t)=v(t)i(t)$ over a full cycle with $v(t)=\sqrt{2}{V}_{\mathrm{rms}}\cos \omega t$ and $i(t)=\sqrt{2}{I}_{\mathrm{rms}}\cos (\omega t-\varphi )$. The cosine addition formula reduces the average to $V_{\mathrm{rms}}{I}_{\mathrm{rms}}\cos \varphi$; the term at $2\omega$ averages to zero. Independently, $p_C=d(C{v}_C^2/2)/dt$, and the capacitor energy returns to its starting value after each cycle.

At fixed applied $V_{\mathrm{rms}}$, the limit $\omega \to 0^{+}$ gives $|Z|\to \infty$, $\varphi \to -\pi /2$ and $I_{\mathrm{rms}}\to 0$: the ideal capacitor blocks steady electric current. The limit $\omega \to \infty$ gives $Z\to R$, $\varphi \to 0$ and $I_{\mathrm{rms}}\to V_{\mathrm{rms}}/R$. These are limits of the ideal lumped electrical circuit; unwanted lead inductance and component losses can invalidate that model at high frequency. At $\omega RC=1$, the equal legs of the impedance right triangle give $|Z|=\sqrt{2}R$ and $\varphi =-\pi /4$ without numerical evaluation. Measuring both the magnitude and the sign of the phase difference distinguishes this capacitor response from an equally large positive electrical reactance.

In a series RLC circuit, the same electric current $i=q^{\prime }$ flows through the resistor with electrical resistance $R$, the inductor, and the capacitor. Choose $q$ as the signed electric charge on the capacitor plate into which positive $i$ flows. With terminal drops measured in that direction, Kirchhoff's voltage law givesHere $V(t)$ is the applied electric potential difference; assume constant $L>0$, $C>0$, and $R>0$. With the applied source set to zero and the loop kept closed, the free response satisfiesThe angular frequency ${\omega }_0$ is the value for lossless free oscillation; $\alpha$ is the decay parameter. The three possibilities are underdamped RLC response for $\alpha <{\omega }_0$, critically damped RLC response for $\alpha ={\omega }_0$, and overdamped RLC response for $\alpha >{\omega }_0$. ^[ref].

For a fair comparison, start each circuit with the same electric charge $q(0)=q_0$ and zero electric current $q^{\prime }(0)=0$. Set $\tau ={\omega }_{0}t$ and $a=\alpha /{\omega }_0$; then $x=q/q_0$ obeys $d^{2}x/d{\tau }^2+2adx/d\tau +x=0$. The plot compares $a=0.5,1,2$. These dimensionless curves apply to any $L,C$ after rescaling time and electric charge.

The stored energy is the sum of magnetic energy and capacitor energy:Differentiating and using the circuit equation gives the complete power balance,In the free response, $E^{\prime }=-R{i}^2\le 0$: Joule heating accounts exactly for the lost energy. For the plotted initial conditions, $E(0)=q_0^2/(2C)$ and $E/E(0)=x^2+(dx/d\tau {)}^2$. Since every free solution tends to zero for $R>0$,In the lossless limit $R=0$, energy stays constant and shuttles between the capacitor and inductor. Thus an oscillation of electric charge and a decrease of total energy are compatible statements.

The analogy with a damped harmonic oscillator is exact within these ideal models: electric charge corresponds to displacement, electric current to velocity, inductance to mass, $1/C$ to spring constant, and $R$ to the coefficient of a resisting force proportional to velocity. The two stored energy terms play the roles of kinetic energy and elastic potential energy. ^[ref].

Differentiating the driven equation also gives $L{i}^{\prime \prime }+R{i}^{\prime }+i/C=V^{\prime }$. When using this equation to solve for electric current, retain the original constraint $L{i}^{\prime }(0)+Ri(0)+q(0)/C=V(0)$: the initial electric charge fixes the initial rate of change of electric current.

An ideal short circuit fixes zero electric potential difference across a terminal pair, corresponding to zero load electrical impedance. At the end of a lossless transmission line, its voltage-wave reflection coefficient is $-1$ and the terminal voltage is zero. The available current is still limited by source and circuit impedances; real short circuits can dissipate substantial Joule heating.

PHYWE's documented experiment uses a one-metre slide wire, a connection box, an unknown resistor, a known comparison resistor, a supply, and a digital multimeter in steady-current mA mode as the null detector. Its two yellow detector leads join the fixed-resistor junction and the slider. Move the slider until the indicated electric current vanishes; read the two wire lengths on the ruler and infer the unknown electrical resistance from their ratio. The guide advises changing the comparison resistor if no null is reachable or the slider lies near an end.^[ref]

The inference requires uniform electrical resistivity and wire cross-sectional area, so the two wire electrical resistances have the ratio of their lengths, by $R={\rho }_{\mathrm{el}}L/A$. Retaining PHYWE's labeling, its equation (6) is $R_x=R_C{\ell }_1/{\ell }_2$, where $R_C$ is the comparison electrical resistance. This is a different arm placement from our schematic. The guide's example table reports larger discrepancies near wire ends.^[ref]

Useful additional controls distinguish a true null measurement from an insensitive or disconnected detector. Check the detector zero with the supply off, then move the adjustable arm slightly to either side of the candidate balance and verify opposite detector signs. Reconnect the unknown with short, secure leads and repeat the balance. Any lead or contact electrical resistance included in that arm contributes to the inferred value, even though a detector lead carries no electric current at exact balance. For very small unknown electrical resistances, four-terminal sensing addresses this separate connection problem; a detector null alone does not remove it.

Check for Joule heating by repeating at lower supply electric potential difference and with shorter powered intervals, holding ambient temperature fixed. At balance the unknown still dissipates powerHalving $V_s$ quarters this power while halving ideal detector sensitivity. A balance that moves with excitation or elapsed time suggests changing electrical resistance, including self-heating; it is not explained by passive detector loading alone. These are proposed controls, not claimed outcomes of PHYWE's experiment. Standard-resistor accuracy, wire uniformity, contact reproducibility and finite detector resolution still limit the electrical measurement. Large electrical resistances also make unwanted leakage paths consequential.