The negative impedance concept is so attractive that some authors try to bring it on even the most basic electrical elements as voltage and current sources. See as an example the work of this Wikipedian (although it seems his own creation, it is assembled entirely by else's thoughts extracted from reputable sources):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chetvorno/work6#Negative_static_or_.22absolute.22_resistance

Also, this viewpoint was presented by Simone Orcioni in the question below:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_the_op-amp_in_all_the_inverting_circuits_with_negative_feedback_behave_as_a_negative_impedance_element_negative_resistor_capacitor_etc

As far as I understand, this "negative resistance viewpoint at voltage sources" is the following. A voltage source is connected to a load (a resistor)... so the voltage V (VG in he  Simone's figure) across them and the current I through them are the same... and therefore the ratio V/I (the resistance) for each element is the same (see the first attached picture below)... Thus the resistor has a resistance RL = V/I and the voltage source has a "negative resistance" RS = V/-I = -RL... so the sum of the two resistances (voltages, according to KVL) is zero... It sounds temptingly simple but...

In this arrangement, there is only one "main" voltage source and one resistor (the load)... and this is the possibly simplest electric circuit still from 19-th century - a source driving a load. But the popular belief is that "negative resistance" is a "supplemental" concept... It implies another (supplemental, "helping") voltage source (BH in the second attached picture)... and this is not an ordinary constant but "dynamic" voltage source whose voltage is proportional to the current flowing through it (a 2-terminal current-to voltage converter)... and so it will act as a negative resistor with resistance -Ri. This negative resistance compensates another positive resistance Ri (e.g., the source internal resistance or the line resistance) thus giving as a result zero total resistance between the main source VIN and the load RL... and this 4-component circuit is reduced to the Simone's initial 2-component circuit (source and load)... The sense of this "trick" is that the unwanted resistance Ri (the voltage drop across it) is neutralized by an equivalent voltage:

http://www.circuit-fantasia.com/circuit_stories/inventing_circuits/ser_nr_comp/ser_neg_res_comp.htm

If this supplemental voltage source was an ordinary constant voltage source, it would still compensate the voltage drop across Ri... but only for one value of the current; maybe because of that they name this kind of "negative resistance" with the name "static negative resistance". Really, it can compensate also the relatively steady voltage drop across a constant-voltage nonlinear resistor (diode, LED, Zener diode, etc)... but this is just another special case...

Note that, in contrast with an ordinary source, this exotic voltage source will not independently produce voltage if there is no input voltage VIN; it starts acting after the main (input) voltage source begins increasing its voltage from zero.

IMO the word "resistor"/"negative resistor" has the meaning of something that resists/"helps" the current flowing through it... so it implies some initial current produced by another (main, input) voltage source... Therefore, this main source is simply a source, not a negative resistor... and maybe this viewpoint is just a misconseption as many others in the field of negative impedance phenomena?

I would add here also the questions asked by Lutz Wangenheim: "Does it make sense to interpret this scenario as a connection of a positive and a negative resistance of the same value? More than that, are voltage and current directions of the voltage source in accordance with the DEFINIONS of a negative resistance? If this would be true, we could treat each voltage source in each circuit as a negative resistance, couldn´t we?"

More Cyril Mechkov's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions