0
\$\begingroup\$

To the question with the title:

"What's the point of a current source?" at What's the point of a current source?, I answered:

"It's implicit in the symbol, but explicitly it's a "constant current" source."

To me, that seemed like a perfectly sensible way to answer the gist of the question and, while terse, was accurate.

My answer was subsequently downgraded to a comment and, after searching the help files on Stack Exchange Meta, I could find no reason for the action.

Clue, please?

| |
\$\endgroup\$
3
\$\begingroup\$

I didn't convert it into a comment, but I can see why.

If you look at the accepted answer, you understand what the question really asked for and what is an appropriate answer. Your comment is correct, but does not actually help the OP in understanding why the current is not different "before" and "after" the supposed current source.

So nothing wrong with it, I wouldn't consider it a downgrade. But I do think it's not the answer that anyone with that doubt would look for.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ OK, thanks. :-) I disagree that it's not a downgrade since it can't now accumulate rep - positive or negative - but I agree with your reason for the conversion. \$\endgroup\$ – EM Fields Jan 22 '15 at 10:57
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @EMFields wow that was smooth :) \$\endgroup\$ – clabacchio Jan 22 '15 at 10:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .