Talk:Residual-resistance ratio
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
 | The contents of the Residual resistivity page were merged into Residual-resistance ratio on 8 October 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Inaccuracies[edit]
I can't see why this is relevant to telephone lines because they don't operate at super-conducting temperature. Surely, what matters is their resistance at normal operating temperature? Biscuittin (talk) 20:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
the definition of the RRR is not correct. Copper is not a super conductor, even silver nor alkali-metals. they have no superconducting state. normally you use the resistance at a low temperature, where is no influence of the resistance by phonons. There are just crystallographic defects relevant for resistance. these defects depend on the purity of the metal. 77.10.47.9 (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that the article is extremely inaccurate. RRR is used to characterize metals in general, not just superconductors. This isn't really my expertise but I will endeavor to clean the article up a little. JaredAllred (talk) 18:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I quickly rewrote the article but it is too simplistic and I think there are still many errors. At least the qualitative aspect is correct.JaredAllred (talk) 19:02, 1 November 2011 (UTC)