Well, shit. My phone are my reply which was quite long. So sorry my second go will be worse.

The EMF requirement is yours not mine. I don't see why an emf of 0 is a problem. Just a special case of complex impedances. But given your requirement capacitors fit.
.
I've also never heard the term "series loop" before, and that only holds for a pair. What would you call it work 3, 4,5 or more capacitors connected how I specified as parallel?

When you say"no it only behaves that way", that's what I was talking about. A paralleled set of capacitors can be plugged in and behaves as one capacitor too am external circuit. Circulating currents or not ate part of that. A parallel R And C behave as a single complex Z externally, and certainly have circulating currents even in the ideal case.

As for describing it with a single capacitor, this is where pedantry falls because it goes all the way down.You can't describe a single real capacitor as an an ideal point lumped element. So one night as well say "good luck describing any real capacitor as a single capacitor". To preclude one and not the other you have to pick a very specific level of approximation to make your definition of parallel.

Though this of course is where the OPs answer comes from. A pair of ideal capacitors connected in parallel is a single capacitor. The ideal model doesn't work for only having the left half of a capacitor charged in isolation. Or alternatively implies infinite currents. But since it's not ideal...

Imagine you have R, C on series with a battery. R charges C too 10V and then C2 is connected in parallel with C. You are I presume on with that. Now let R get very large. At some point, say 10^12 ohms, it becomes indistinguishable from a cut wire. So at what point does it become not parallel?

On to the switches. I have a DC powered device with some input filtering, namely a couple of capacitors in a series loop with the pair of those forming a series loop with the rest of the circuit. Is that how I should describe it when off? I can assure you any EE would look at me like I had sprouted an extra head of I said that when the circuit was off, and parallel when on. It's the same circuit diagram after all!

I can tell that you have no idea what you're talking about because the vast majority of public K-12 school funding is through local taxes, not federal funding. The federal government has almost no control over it so they can't cut funding. If you look at the actual spending on a per pupil basis it's gone up significantly in red and blue areas alike.

The percentage of students enrolled in private schools tends to be slightly higher in blue states as well. The biggest private schools tend to be Catholic (or other religious) schools that aren't that expensive. There are also many states that have charter schools that perform better for less money than the public schools, so it's not a money problem.

The U.S. should invest in expanding the number of charter schools. The real problem is that the public school system has very little competition and therefore no reason to improve. When Sweden expanded charter schools they found that the public schools performed better as well because they had to provide better service.

When all children are left behind, no child is left behind. The system has become too paralyzed in trying (and failing) so hard to never fail a student or even make them feel like they might be, that they're failing all of the students collectively.

It would be an ok point, but the trouble is just about everything you can say about Harris is about a thousand tribes worse with trump. He's the king of word salads.

If that were the case why wouldn't they already have done this? It's less expensive to hire an Indian working and living in India than it is to hire an Indian H-1B worker in the U.S.

Oh fair enough.

We needed to stop it in America in 2024 by electing Kamala Harris but we didn't.

Yeah but she had a stupid laugh. I mean she wasn't found by a court of law to be a rapist or racist. And she wasn't using the system to massively enrich herself. And she wasn't both ancient and going senile. And she wasn't going to appoint such incompetent people that Hillary's emailed paled in comparison.

But her laugh. Also Benghazi for some reason. And maybe pizza or whatever.

-1 Troll, here I come!

It cares about it's citizens. Except the ones who criticise Xi. Or the ones living somewhere where it's convent to pollute. Or the ones who have the wrong religion. Or the ones it's using for slave labour. Or the ones it's actually committing genocide against.

Sure, "most" might be happy with that but most Brits were pretty happy with going around the world, invading places and stealing their shit.

"Things hooked in parallel (Figure 1.1) have the same voltage across them."

Ah you mean the entire premise of the OP's question?

So no the source of the EMF is not shown but it is clearly there as the text underneath states. Thank you for proving my point.

At this point I have to wonder if you know how capacitors work. If those two floating wires are unconnected to an EMF, the two capacitors will still have the same voltage across them, due to whatever charge/energy is stored in them.

You don't need an external EMF to have a voltage across them.

And in fact it'll be behaving like one capacitor with the sum of capacitance in that regard.

In fact it's really easy to imagine using switches to convert a parallel circuit to a series circuit.

No shit, sherlock. But I'm not talking about switched capacitor filters or supplies or Marx generators or anything like that, but something much, much simpler.

You have a battery. Connect it to a resistor, then that to a capacitor then back to the battery. R1 and C1 are in series. A basic RC circuit. Now connect another capacitor in parallel with C1. You now have a pair of parallel capacitors, in a way we both (I assume, who knows) understand.

Now replace the resistor with a switch. Are those capacitors still in parallel?

I don't think that they ever will invade because Taiwan might retaliate and blow up the Three Gorges Dam. The devastation that would cause isn't worth gaining control of Taiwan. Instead they'll try to exert soft power to gain control in a more diplomatic fashion. Even if they believed Taiwan couldn't pull that off or that they could stop any attempt, any invasion doesn't guarantee control of valuable resources. Im sure TSMC has someone whose job it is to take a hammer to all of the machines if an invasion occurs. Being willing to destroy the things your enemy wants to seize and letting them know that you'll do it can also do a lot to dissuade aggressive actions as well.

China isn't stupid and after spending the last several years watching Russia destroy itself as much as Ukraine, I can't imagine they're looking to put themselves into a similar situation.

In the UK, which (I think that's like consumer reports in the US) has basic high performing models for £30, so 40 bucks?

With that said, it'll get near daily use and probably last a decade. Even at $200, that's 2c per slice toasted. Though apparently often the expensive toasters aren't that good.

Making something small and compact can easily be more expensive than a product without those constraints. The resolution on most phone displays is close to as good as that on many laptops or even desktop displays. It's more difficult and hence more expensive to make a high PPI touchscreen display for a phone than to make a larger desktop monitor with the same resolution. Boards don't need to cram everything into as small of a space either. A laptop doesn't need to contain a cellular modem/baseband either.

Apple already makes iPads that are much larger than their phones, but also cost much less. I'm more surprised that they would do this because it means that they're cannibalizing some of their own Mac sales that are sure to have better margins. Their phone SoCs aren't that much less expensive than their basic M-series SoCs. Either these are compromising a lot on less expensive components across the board and are being positioned as a more expensive iPad replacement or they think they can sell enough of these to make up for lost profit from purchases of other Mac models.

You're not wrong, but this is a website populated mostly by that 1%. I suspect that most of the people here do upgrade components or build their own PCs from parts.

You'd have to pay me to take it. I don't like ads on my television or my computer, so why would I want them anywhere that never not existed previously? If they are willing to pay me, then I'll take a few million fridges. If they were free, I'd take them as well. They'd look lovely lining the ravine near my house.

You can do that with any modern phone but people don't do it....

Kiiiinda I guess, but somehow everything is shit.