# The nature of the electric current (Hypothesis)

## Recommended Posts

We have been taught that current is the movement of particles. But that doesn't match what it is traveling at the speed of light.
I was thinking about it, and it seems that current is wave that behaves like light wave in black body. There is principal of multiple reflection of the wave from the walls of the conductor.
This also explains the fact that conductors usually have a glossy surface.

##### Share on other sites
2 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

We have been taught that current is the movement of particles. But that doesn't match what it is traveling at the speed of light.
I was thinking about it, and it seems that current is wave that behaves like light wave in black body. There is principal of multiple reflection of the wave from the walls of the conductor.
This also explains the fact that conductors usually have a glossy surface.

Electric currents do not travel at light speed.

##### Share on other sites
6 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

We have been taught that current is the movement of particles. But that doesn't match what it is traveling at the speed of light.

The electrons in current carrying conductor do not move very fast but the electromagnetic waves in the conducter move at the speed of light through the conductor.  So a light may turn on almost instantly when switched on but the electrons from the source will take a while to reach the light.

##### Share on other sites

Most households use AC where the electrons jiggle in place.

##### Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mathematic said:

Most households use AC where the electrons jiggle in place.

Agreed, I was using a DC example so the electrons would move in the direction of the current.

##### Share on other sites

Okay, since your are talking about DC current where do "electromagnetic waves" come into it?  Electromagnetic waves do not travel along wires.

##### Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Country Boy said:

Okay, since your are talking about DC current where do "electromagnetic waves" come into it?  Electromagnetic waves do not travel along wires.

I am not very well versed in electronics so I may have gotten my terminology wrong.

This is from wiki:  In everyday electrical and electronic devices, the signals travel as electromagnetic waves typically at 50%–99% of the speed of light, while the electrons themselves move much more slowly.

My point to the OP was the signal in the circuit travels very fast but the drift speed of the electrons in the conductor is slow.

##### Share on other sites
On 3/30/2021 at 6:45 AM, altaylar2000 said:

We have been taught that current is the movement of particles. But that doesn't match what it is traveling at the speed of light.
I was thinking about it, and it seems that current is wave that behaves like light wave in black body. There is principal of multiple reflection of the wave from the walls of the conductor.
This also explains the fact that conductors usually have a glossy surface.

This is just a speculation and you seem to have spent a lot of time here discussing other matters without visiting this thread.

Are you still interested ?

##### Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, studiot said:

This is just a speculation and you seem to have spent a lot of time here discussing other matters without visiting this thread.

Are you still interested ?

Yes. It's just that I don't see here serious objections on the merits. I think my hypothesis is valid

By the way, the fiber optic signal behaves similarly

##### Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Yes. It's just that I don't see here serious objections on the merits. I think my hypothesis is valid

By the way, the fiber optic signal behaves similarly

You have made some good points but left out all the background as others have observed, even to the extent of not indicating what sort of current you are referring to.

Current is a very general term that refers to transport of charge by charge carriers or transport of energy in electromagnetic fields.

There are many complications to discuss.

##### Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

Agreed, I was using a DC example so the electrons would move in the direction of the current.

The point I am making is the speed of the electrons is irrelevant to electricity working.

##### Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Fiber optics works nothing like electrons in a wire. It's based on total reflection of coherent light at smaller than critical angle at which total reflection occurs. You can experience total reflection on the window of your home. Electrons don't go at the speed of light even in a vacuum, let alone in a conductor, as @beecee said. It seems you're confusing many things here. The black body radiation is in equilibrium with the electrons in it, which is a very different situation to conductivity. etc.

Edited by joigus
minor change in word choice
##### Share on other sites
4 hours ago, joigus said:

Fiber optics works nothing like electrons in a wire.

I believe that it is not electrons that work in the wire, but the wave itself.

The same delusion previously existed in Newton's theory of light, that light is supposedly moving particles and energy transfer is carried out due to them.

##### Share on other sites
5 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

I believe that it is not electrons that work in the wire, but the wave itself.

The same delusion previously existed in Newton's theory of light, that light is supposedly moving particles and energy transfer is carried out due to them.

Can we clear some things up here ?

This thread did not start with sufficient information for a sensible discussion and has IMHO deteriorated since through lack of sufficient OP input.

What do you want to achieve from this thread  ?

##### Share on other sites
1 minute ago, studiot said:

What do you want to achieve from this thread  ?

We are here discussing the idea that electricity in conductors has a wave nature, and not a nature due to the flow of particles

##### Share on other sites

5 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

I believe that it is not electrons that work in the wire, but the wave itself.

You may have just "discovered" quantum mechanics. Everything everywhere works as a wave. Right?

We even have a name for that wave: Conduction band.

##### Share on other sites
Just now, joigus said:

You may have just "discovered" quantum mechanics. Everything everywhere works as a wave. Right?

We even have a name for that wave: Conduction band.

I think that quantum mechanics, on the contrary, is trying to revive Newton's concept of particles moving in a void. Just their photons supposedly flying in a vacuum from this series. They even distorted the very concept of "quantum" for the sake of this, because this is the Planck's term, and he meant by this a portion of the wave during emission and absorption, and not a particle

In addition, the concept of long-range action in quantum spin is actually used there, long-range action is generally recognized as anti-scientific obscurantism

##### Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

We are here discussing the idea that electricity in conductors has a wave nature, and not a nature due to the flow of particles

Of course it does, except that it is not electricity in conductors, but electricity on conductors.

But this wave behaviour is quite different from that of optical fibre systems.

And, of course, you must then be talking about alternating current or transients.

But then there are the electrical engineers' circuit models and physicists' models and chemists' models all for different purposes.

And there is conduction current and displacement current

And, of course, electrons are not the only current carriers, some are not even physical particles.

So pony up and pin down some specifics please.

Otherwise we shall be forever in the he-said-this - she-said-that mode.

##### Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

I think that quantum mechanics, on the contrary, is trying to revive Newton's concept of particles moving in a void.

John Donne said that no man is an island, but you seem to be the exception that proves the rule.

Quantum mechanics "is trying" nothing of the kind.

x-posted with Studiot.

##### Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, joigus said:

John Donne said that no man is an island, but you seem to be the exception that proves the rule.

Quantum mechanics "is trying" nothing of the kind.

There are all indications that they are talking about the same model that the ancient atomists and Newton spoke of. This is not only a physical, but also a religious, historical, philosophical and ideological question.

Edited by altaylar2000
##### Share on other sites

It is also worth noting that it is possible to have current without voltage and voltage without current, although the two are often linked.

This simple fact is often overlooked.

##### Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, studiot said:

It is also worth noting that it is possible to have current without voltage and voltage without current, although the two are often linked.

This simple fact is often overlooked.

Voltage without current is trivial: it is an open loop with a source.
Current without voltage is not exist

17 hours ago, Country Boy said:

Okay, since your are talking about DC current where do "electromagnetic waves" come into it?  Electromagnetic waves do not travel along wires.

How is this current measured with an induction coil in current meters?

##### Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Current without voltage is not exist

Of course it does.

There are at least three possible mechanisms.

##### Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, studiot said:

Of course it does.

There are at least three possible mechanisms.

List them.

##### Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

List them.

When you have responded to my earlier points.

Why are you being so awkward with the only person in this thread who has not directly challenged you until now ?

15 hours ago, studiot said:

You have made some good points but left out all the background as others have observed, even to the extent of not indicating what sort of current you are referring to.

I repeat you have made some good points, but add that you also appear so harbour some misunderstandings.

I am offering a serious discussion, not a game of ping pong.

##### Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×

• #### Activity

×
• Create New...