Editing 2642: Meta-Alternating Current

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 14: Line 14:
 
This comic proposes a humorous ''Meta-Alternating Current'', which uses a series of adapters to "alternate" between DC and AC current along the length of a connector. This is absurd in part because typical {{w|power inverter}} efficiency is 90%, and maximum {{w|bridge rectifier}} efficiency is about 99% for 120 V,{{actual citation needed}} so an {{w|extension cord}} made in this manner would lose about 11% power (compounded<!-- ...need a better word for this, but it's very much related to compound interest. It wouldn't be 100% loss after nine steps, but ~91% loss, i.e. 0.90*0.99)^9 -->) per such pair. For the wire shown in the comic, with seven pairs, the efficiency would be 0.89<sup>7</sup>, which is 0.45, that is, 45%.
 
This comic proposes a humorous ''Meta-Alternating Current'', which uses a series of adapters to "alternate" between DC and AC current along the length of a connector. This is absurd in part because typical {{w|power inverter}} efficiency is 90%, and maximum {{w|bridge rectifier}} efficiency is about 99% for 120 V,{{actual citation needed}} so an {{w|extension cord}} made in this manner would lose about 11% power (compounded<!-- ...need a better word for this, but it's very much related to compound interest. It wouldn't be 100% loss after nine steps, but ~91% loss, i.e. 0.90*0.99)^9 -->) per such pair. For the wire shown in the comic, with seven pairs, the efficiency would be 0.89<sup>7</sup>, which is 0.45, that is, 45%.
  
βˆ’
The title text bemoans that an inverter, which converts direct current to alternating current, does not work in the other direction, as a layman's interpretation of the word "inverter" might assume. Rather, a separate device, a {{w|rectifier}}, also pictured in the comic, must be used for this second conversion. (However, a similar circuit to an inverter may be used to rectify in a process called {{w|active rectification}}.)
+
The title text bemoans that an inverter, which converts direct current to alternating current, does not work in the other direction, as a layman's interpretation of the word "inverter" might appear. Rather, a separate device, a {{w|rectifier}}, also pictured in the comic, must be used for this second conversion. (However, a similar circuit to an inverter may be used to rectify in a process called {{w|active rectification}}.)
  
 
==Transcript==
 
==Transcript==

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)