westom

Please do not be daft. Of course we measure the electricity. Some of the many parameters listed previously and repeatedly. Even your joule heating example says why electricity is not same at both ends of the wire. The fact that you ignore all three examples simply highlights that you do not understand those simple electrical concepts. But again, is the voltage same at both ends of a wire? Obviously not. Repeatedly stated. And constantly ignored by you. That is only one parameter. Plenty of other parameters also state quite clearly that electricity is different. Why do you constantly ignore the telegrapher's equation ... that also says electricity is different at both ends? What do you do with every example that demonstrates it? Ignore it. Please go back and learn this simple stuff before posting. It is not hard. Even voltage will be different at both ends. It is that simple. Stated repeatedly. And ignored. So even the car is different between 'here' and 'there'. You just said so. That analogy simply demonstrates what I have been saying all along.

Car analogy does not apply. When electricity is in any part of that wire, it is on all parts of that wire. Car is either here or there - and never at both places. Of course, once that car gets 'there', it is no longer same as 'here'. It contains less gas. Not that it is relevant to electricity. Sometimes people try to explain electricity with water. It works better. And still some concepts in hydrology are different from electricity. Another example. Power a long wire antenna from a 200 watt transmitter. Touch one part of that wire to be shocked by maybe 100 volts. Touch another part to feel zero volts. How can that be if electricity is always same at all parts of a wire? Electricity is again different at various locations on that wire.

Electricity is clearly the movement of electrons between two charges. That movement creates a large number of parameters including voltage, phase, an E filed, current, frequency, standing waves, an H field, and many other parameters. Electricity - a movement of charges across the Atlantic on a wire. What resulted is electricity on each end of that wire was different. The Telegrapher's equation was but one early example of how electricity is always different at both ends of a wire. So rather than argue, please explain why electricity is always same at both ends of a wire. List parameters that support your belief. Rather than just argue, instead, put up some facts. Another example of why we know electricity is always different at both ends of a wire. I suspect you do not know the different between longitudinal mode and transverse mode voltages. That also would explain why you do not grasp these concepts. Only nonsense is that conclusion. Put too much current through a wire (even in a vacuum) and it turns into plasma. No wire is an ideal conductor. Simplest science knowledge make that obvious. Conductors have small resistance or large resistance. Insulators that have high resistance can also have low resistance. Examples of subjective (and therefore junk science) reasoning. "Large" and "small" says nothing useful without numbers. Meanwhile if it has high resistance or low resistance, electricity remains different at both ends. How does electricity travel through one of the best insulators - air? Insulating gases are still conductive. Just less so. No ideal conductor nor ideal insulator exists. Another basic electrical concept that remains unlearned. A thinnest wire can conduct 20,000 volts (ie static charges) and not be damaged. Voltage is an irrelevant (destructive) parameter. Another conclusion justified only by speculation and subjective rationalization.

You are just not getting it. Second of two pictures: a 'B' wire connects switch 1 to resistor 1. Since switch 1 is closed, a current is passing through that 'B' wire. That current means a voltage exists between the 'B' wire's switch 1 connection and its resistor 1 connection. If a voltage did not exist, then that wire has no impedance. No impedance means that 'B' wire can conduct infinite current and never burn out. It cannot. Wire always has impedance. Therefore that 'B' wire has a voltage where it connects to the switch. And clearly has a different voltage where it connects to a resistor. Since those voltages are different, then a voltage difference exist between both ends of the wire. Same applies to a previous mesh circuit. Those black lines are not perfect conductors. Ideal conductors never exist. Between every Z component is a conductor (an electronic part) that creates a voltage. Every closed switch and wire has impedance. That impedance is why every wire can only carry a limited current. And as current increases, voltages at both ends of that wire are more different. Second picture shows the switch closed. Caption reads "current no voltage". Impossible. Again, the voltage A-B exists. It is non-zero. It cannot possibly be zero. This is the simple stuff that was not learned. And so (Phil- stated because it is a fact without any insult, any emotion, or any trolling) the sentence said, "Please learn the simple stuff." Read the datasheet for any switch ever made. Even a closed switch has electronic parameters. One datasheet number is typically milliohms. Since milliohms of resistance exist in every switch, then a voltage A-B always exists across every switch. Is that voltage significant? Irrelevant to the fact. Does a voltage always exist across a closed switch that is conducting current? Of course. Always. So a voltage at both ends of that switch is always different. And therefore a voltage difference always exists across a switch - whether relevant or irrelevant. That is the point stated repeatedly. Same applies to every wire. Electrical parameters are always different at both ends of a wire. For the same reasons that a voltage difference always exists across every switch - if open, or if closed and conducting a current. I just don't get why this is so hard. studiot - you are not dealing with reality. You are trying to claim ideal circuit theory exists in the real world. To keep it simplified, we invent something that has never existed - the ideal conductor. In the real world, a voltage always exists at two ends of any wire or switch that is conducting electricity. In the real world, no ideal conductor exists. Only time that electricity can be same at both ends of a wire or switch? When it is not conducting electricity. Why is this simple stuff is so hard to grasp?

BTW, I did explain that. Notice that Fourier Series was completely explained in one paragraph. Waveforms are simply a sum of sines and cosines - AC currents. Obviously turning on DC power (a step wave) is a sum of AC currents. Also noted: Fourier Series was even taught in high school math. And that the Pulsed DC is a popular joke among engineers. I am not going to write a chapter about Fourier Series. But if he wanted to learn, then he would have asked questions - not posted denials. He did not ask to understand how Fourier Series was relevant. He ignored how switched DC currents created the first radio communications because switched DC is AC currents. Instead, only posted were empty denials or comments that even completely ignored that reality. As if I do not know what I am talking about. I am not going to teach the entire chapter on Fourier Series. Especially when some clearly never get past the first few paragraphs. If he wanted to learn, then he stated what is relevant and why he does not understand that. No such comment was posted. Only more denials. One cannot explain this stuff to another who will not even ask what part of Fourier Series is relevant to the topic. In short, what I keep doing is challenging others to see why switching DC voltages creates AC currents. Even ignored and denied: that a static electric discharge creates radio and TV interference - AC currents. He did not ask to learn. Only argued from feeling - and not from how science works. Well that is a complete contradiction. Either cable has no effects on electricity. Or those effects means electricity is different at both ends of a wire. For example, we say the current in is same as current out - only in amperes. That current has phase changes. Its relationship to the other parameter that also describes electricity is changed. Telegrapher's equations makes that obvious. And does not include other relevant parameters including leakage currents. Electricity is never same at both ends of a wire. How much difference? Again, any denial must discuss the numbers - how much difference. It is always different. The statement insists that any denial must discuss numbers. If you know otherwise, then explain why the Telegrapher's equation exists - that explains, with parameters (numbers, how different electricity is as the other end.

Please go learn the simple stuff. Yes electricity is always different at both ends of a wire. Start with something layman simple such as the Telegrapher's Equation. Because even wire is an electronic device.

The term "electricity" defines electricity. Voltage is only one parameter of electricity. Voltage is but one parameter that is different at two ends of a wire. You are expected to know that. A wire has electronic parameters. Parameters that mean electricity is never same at two ends of a wire. Switching electricity off and on DOES create AC currents. We would joke about the naive who somehow believed in pulsed DC currents. It exists when speculation rather than knowledge makes a conclusion. Apparently you do not know anything about the Fourier series. Please go learn this simple and relevant math before posting more empty and bogus denials. Had you first learned (from science or math), then you know that switching DC currents created AC currents. Those that do not become humor for the educated. Learn about Fourier Series. Then only reply. I expect is an attitude change from one of demeaning denials to one of curiosity and humility.

Pulse DC was always joke in engineering school. It does not exist. Anyone can use math to see why. For example, use a Fourier Transform on that "pulsed DC". What is it? A sum of sine and cosine waves. A sum of oscillating frequencies. Either it is a DC voltage (constant and with no switching). Or it is a sum of AC voltages.

Noted previously that superconductors still have some resistance. And then noted was, " Impedance (which is clearly not resistance) is a parameter at play." Superconductors change behavior when frequencies increase. Which is a transient discussion and really not relevant to static charges (also called static electricity) verses something completely different called a static electric discharges (also called electricity). Static charges have an E field and no H field. Static electric discharges are moving charges. Therefore an H field exists. Motion is relevant to the location of original static charges. That current is always between two charges. Superconductivity really has no place in this discussion. Discussion is about basic concepts of "static electricity" and "electricity" (two different entities) as defined long before superconductivity was known. After the difference between static charges and moving charges (electricity) were defined, you ask the same question again. As if never read. I answered it anyway. Now you are asking about some observer. Neither you nor I are relevant to two separate static charges and any motion between and relevant to those charges. (Unless you are asking about Schrodinger's cat which is irrelevant here). Discussion is only about static charges and motion of charges between those two locations. Only those are relevant. Even earth ground is irrelevant. I have limited time. Answers must be limited to misinformation, sentences intentionally taken out of context to simply confuse others, and 'bizarre' accusations that have no place here. I also ignored his silly belief that electricity is always same at both ends of a wire. Too many comments that contradict what is all so obvious; Other misinformation. Just because Maxwell's equations define electricity does not mean it does not define static charges. In fact, Maxwell's equations define the difference between "static electricity" and a "static electric discharge". Another misstatement that was best just ignored because it was obvious. What is relevant? Two separated charges and a current that can discharge those charges. Clearly earth ground is irrelevant. That current (electricity) exists only when two separate charges exist and when connected resulting in moving electrons (charges).. Just as ridiculous is an inability to grasp many frequencies created when a DC source is switched on or off. Even high school calculus makes that mistake obvious. For rigorous definitions, perspective (numbers) must be included. Unfortunately, denials are constantly using subjective terms. In the world of layman, static electricity and static charges are same. To quantify that qualitative discussion, then discuss H fields. Unfortunately naysayers do not even know what an H field nor impedance is. Making quantitative (rigorous) discussion nearly impossible and really beyond the scope of this discussion. Discussion must remain at an executive summary level. Since one does not even know that a switched on or off DC source always results in AC currents at various frequencies. He even ignores noise created during switching. Or a well understood example called lightning - that creates frequencies seen on TV screens and heard on radios. Even the lightning detection network monitors those radio frequencies created when two separated charges are connected (ie a DC current that is turned on and turned off). Topic is about static charges and electricity when charges are moving.

Do you switch on a current? Then it is not DC. That is taught in first semester course material. But somehow you know more? Clearly not. Because you do not know how to learn. That wikipedia quote is missing many relevant facts. And demonstrates how easily one can be scammed. One who is an expert but forgot to first learn. You are arguing and accusing when a responsible person instead would be learning and asking. You demonstrate why wacko extremists exist. Impedance is significant. Earliest radio transmitters simply turned on and off a DC current. Which creates currents at many frequencies. Static electric discharge is also not DC - for same reason. Lightning is simply a static electric discharge at higher energies. It causes radio frequency interference because "that flow of electrons in one direction" create radio frequency noise across all frequencies. Please learn these basic concepts before going off, half cocked, making claims only justified by a soundbite combined with junk science reasoning. First learn how electricity works. Quoting something subjective is the first indication that you are so easily scammed. You have no idea why impedance is significant. You did not even know that static discharges and its cousin, lightning, create AC currents. Only impedance (not resistance) is relevant. But that means becoming educated before lecturing anyone. Had you taken a first course in electrical theory, then you would have never posted such embarrassing ignorance. You simple demonstrate why extremism exists. Experts who did not bother to first learn reality.

And had you been reading what was already posted, then you know I already said that. Go back and read what you ignored. it is all there. No reason exists to convince you or anything. If reasons why were actually read before having an opinion, then you would not now be posting what was stated clearly and previously. Go back and read what you intentionally ignored. At what point will you finally learn about that "other ... at play". Impedance (which is clearly not resistance) is a parameter at play. How many times must this be stated before you finally read what was stated repeatedly? And that is the point. You want to argue - by completely ignoring what is written. Apparently you do not even know what impedance is. And why it is relevant. So you want to argue anyway. Why does that ring of current diminish? Your citation demonstrates it. But is ignore due to selectively reading only what you want to see. Even resistance exists - no matter how many times you deny it.

If zero, then the current continued forever. Even the article is clear about his. It does not continue for ever. Current just lasts longer - because resistance is so much smaller. So small as that it cannot be measured (for some superconductors). But resistance still exists. Term impedance has again been completely ignored. Impedance (not just resistance) is relevant. Do you know what impedance is? Most here clearly do not. Meanwhile to point remains. Earth ground is irrelevant to his discharge of static electricity. That discharge is between charges are two separate locations.

Any fool can make accusations. Everything accurately posted included reasons why it is known or is relevant. You constantly contradict Kirchoff's voltage law, Kirchoff's current law, Rosen's Theorem, Millman's Theorem, Node analysis, Loop analysis, Maxwell's mesh curent theorem, Norton's theorem, and Thevenin's theorem. Naysayers and extremists do that only to argue. You are clearly and repeatedly wrong. And anti-social to boot. Anything you say lacks credibility. First indication that you are lying are claims made without perspective - numbers. But once again, your bogus accusations have not one honest reason to justify it. Your only proof is in demaning others. An honest person would have said why those concepts were violated. You cannot. You simply demonstrate that any fool can post fancy terms to look intelligent. If you knew what those terms meant, then we read why each was relevant. That requires what you do not have - basic knowledge. The fundamental point remains unchallenged. Static electric discharges are an electric current between two charges. Earth ground is irrelevant. Only relevant are locations of those two charges. Sorry that is too complicated for an extremist naysayer to understand. But that is who you are. A conductor that connects those two charges ALWAYS has impedance. There is no perfect conductor as claims by the naysayers emotions. Electricity is defined by two relevant parameters - voltage and current. One is the independent variable. The other is a dependent variable. That relationship is defined by what always exists on conductors - impedance. If a conductor was perfects - as a nasty and ignorant naysayer claims, then no voltage can exist. Even students of high school science can understand that. A naive naysayer will post anything else just to waste bandwidth. Bugs Bunny best defines him. What a maroon.. Apparently a relevant difference between impedance and resistance was overlooked. That difference is significant even in superconductors. Furthermore zero resistance does not exist in a superconductor. A substantially lower resistance exists.

"Static electricity" is not same as "electricity". Those two words "static' and "electricity", when combined, clearly mean something different from the single word "electricity". That is what I said much earlier and again recently. To keep others from being confused, better is to replace the term "static electricity" with "static charges". The "electricity" created by static charges is also called a "static electric discharge". Those three words define something completely different from a two word term. "static electric". It is clearly not zero according to circuit theory. Electricity is always different at both ends of a wire for so many reasons. Including this. All wire has impedance. So a voltage difference always exists with any current in a wire. How big? Not provided are many necessary parameters. So no informed answer is possible. Other than this. A voltage difference always exists in two ends of every wire that is conducting a current. When is voltage between both ends zero? Only when no current flows. OP's science project is always about where two separate charges reside. We simply locate the location of separate positive and negative charges. Then call one of those locations ground. That is the only relevant ground. Either location can be called ground.

The word electricity has different meanings. Another example demonstrates. 'Stress' on a human body increases health (it results in hormones that cause a body to repair itself). Whereas 'stress' can cause premature illness and even contribute to death. The word 'stress' describes two completely different and unrelated actions on a body. And can be used subjectively to confuse and manipulate the naive. Static charges were created by amber which was also called elektron. Static charges created by amber were called electricity. That was long before work by Orsted and others. That word 'electricity' now describes two completely different phenomena in physics. Elektron was long before Coulomb's law was a process of discovering and defining a different concept called electricity. Electricity from elektron has no moving charges. Only an E field created by those stationary charges was first called electricity. No H field exists. Once Faraday noted that moving charges create a H field, then Maxwell used and contributed to his work to create Maxwell's equations. Those equation define the other thing that we all know as electricity: what happens only when electrons (charges) are moving. Junk science will ignore all this. Find a quote. Take it out of context. And then insist that 'static electricity' and what we know only as 'electricity' are same. Classic junk science reasoning. Static electric has no moving charges. It is not electricity. It is 'static electricity'. Which is completely different from 'electricity' also known as an electric current. English nazis will have difficulty for the same reason they cannot understand the difference between 'stress' and 'stress'. The British also fail to understand 'earth ground'. Due to early misinformation, a safety ground (also called equipment ground) in a receptacle is called earth ground by the British. Confusion created by a legacy. Using that reasoning, the neutral wire should also be called a ground. Why not? Because 'earth ground' in a receptacle is completely different from 'earth ground' with an electrode stabbed into it. But again, the naive will myopically focus on a dictionary definition without learning the always required underlying facts and numbers. Then assume an 'earth ground' in a receptacle is same as an 'earth ground' that an electrode is buried in. Misinformation and scams easily promoted using only word association. Words are same. That proves two completely different things must be same. Bull. There was a surge on Wall Street. That means a tidal surge flooded that street? The word 'surge', just like the word stress, just like the expressions 'earth ground', and just like the word electricity; all have multiple meanings. Misinformation is accurately exposed. When two items are charged, only an E field exists. We call that static charge "static electricity". When those charges are connected; only for that short discharge time period do moving charges exist. We call that discharge an "electric current". "Static electricity" and an electric current ("electricity") are completely different. One has no moving charges, no H field, no current, and only a voltage measured in volts/meter. Other has moving charges, must have an H field (as described by Maxwell's equations), has a current, and creates voltage measured in volts - a different unit of measure. Notice how the dictionary describes both. It fails to note the same word describes two completely different phenomena. Those first two sentences describe two completely different things - unfortunately both called electricity. That difference is obvious when one learns from an E-M Fields course. A voltage without current is the E field. It is a static field - no H field exists. When current exists, then an H field exists AND a voltage must exist to move those electrons (charges).