I can't understand why swansont allows, even encourages this to continue.

 

I agree. Can't we resolve this with a simple strait answer? Yes, Current Electricity Theory is Wrong

What the author will have to comment after that?

Certainly the atomic area under electricity would become grey or black, right?

Why would it? There is no change in the charge density. I'd suggest learning the existing accepted and tested ideas before blindly speculating.

If they are electrons, why has no one ever seen the electricity in a circuit? Have they not looked?

 

Certainly the atomic area under electricity would become grey or black, right?

You need to do a better job of explaining your thought process, because this makes no sense. What are you looking for, when you ask if anyone has "seen the electricity in a circuit". Have you ever seen water flow in a pipe of a closed system? You know it's there because of how it behaves.

 

Why on earth would the "atomic area" turn grey or black? How would you check the inside of a wire, anyway?

You need to do a better job of explaining your thought process, because this makes no sense. What are you looking for, when you ask if anyone has "seen the electricity in a circuit". Have you ever seen water flow in a pipe of a closed system? You know it's there because of how it behaves.

 

Why on earth would the "atomic area" turn grey or black? How would you check the inside of a wire, anyway?

Most straws I've ever used (especially restaurant ones) are clear plastic. You can see the water or pop inside them.

Most straws I've ever used (especially restaurant ones) are clear plastic. You can see the water or pop inside them.

 

If they gave medals for non sequiturs, you would get Gold every time.

Most straws I've ever used (especially restaurant ones) are clear plastic. You can see the water or pop inside them.

 

This is one of the most asinine things I have ever read on this forum.

 

I have no words to adequately respond to this. I can only assume that at this point you have to be trolling.

Electrons aren't pushed or pulled Windy. They 'fall', from a high potential to a lower one.

 

As for the rest of you guys, don't you realise when someone is playing you ?

 

 

As for the rest of you guys, don't you realise when someone is playing you ?

I don't think so MigL. voiding wind shows a steady and consistent level of total ignorance. I think it would be difficult to maintain that posture for that long.

But when you put the positive end of one battery to the negative end of another battery, nothing happens. Not until a complete circuit is made. According to normal theory, there should be lots of amps, not a flat zero.

According to normal theory

I don't think you are in any position to say something like that as you appear to have no understanding of theory.

 

Current will only flow when there is a complete circuit from one terminal of the battery to the other.

I don't think you are in any position to say something like that as you appear to have no understanding of theory.

 

Current will only flow when there is a complete circuit from one terminal of the battery to the other.

Why can't it flow between two batteries, then?

Why can't it flow between two batteries, then?

Because you need a closed circuit. The battery works by a reaction taking place at both electrodes. This can only happen if they are part of the same electric circuit.

Because you need a closed circuit. The battery works by a reaction taking place at both electrodes. This can only happen if they are part of the same electric circuit.

I'm not so sure those chemicals would even react on their own.

I don't think you are in any position to say something like that as you appear to have no understanding of theory.

 

Current will only flow when there is a complete circuit from one terminal of the battery to the other.

That would be like saying water can only flow when it lands on the other end of the bottle it came from, which isn't true.

I'm not so sure those chemicals would even react on their own.

 

So what. You don't know anything about the reaction so your opinion doesn't really carry much weight.

 

That would be like saying water can only flow when it lands on the other end of the bottle it came from, which isn't true.

 

Except that isn't how a battery works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_cell

Why can't it flow between two batteries, then?

Internal resistance may be one factor, chaps. Cheers.

And how does/would air act as an insulator when it is 7314 times less dense than copper?

 

And air is not a solid or a structured solid like concrete and plastic and ice.

Air is voluminous. The "electrons" of the normal theory would go between the air or through the air like x-rays and radiation from "radioactive" substances.

Edited August 11, 201312 yr by Windevoid

And how does/would air act as an insulator when it is 7314 times less dense than copper?

 

And air is not a solid or a structured solid like concrete and plastic and ice.

Exactly. In metals, you have free electrons to conduct electricity, but in air, you have only minimal chance to meet an electron (or ion) that would help you. You might want to check on corona effect.

 

In fact, ice, concrete, plastic cannot conduct electricity under normal conditions as they lack free electrons.

And how does/would air act as an insulator when it is 7314 times less dense than copper?

 

And air is not a solid or a structured solid like concrete and plastic and ice.

Air is voluminous. The "electrons" of the normal theory would go between the air or through the air like x-rays and radiation from "radioactive" substances.

 

A vacuum is an insulator, and is infinitely less dense than copper. That would be because density is not a characteristic of a conductor vs insulator.

 

As Mellinia has noted, the characteristic you need is free electrons. Air becomes a conductor once you achieve breakdown voltage, where you can ionize molecules which give you — ta daa! — free electrons.

Air is voluminous. The "electrons" of the normal theory would go between the air or through the air like x-rays and radiation from "radioactive" substances.

 

Electrons are not EM waves and the energy provided by the battery does not reach the ionization energy of the metals.

 

Doing a simple approximation to see if two 1.5 V batteries can provide enough energy to release the electrons from the atom,

 

From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molar_ionization_energies_of_the_elements

 

The first ionization energy of Copper(the material of the wire) is 745.5 kJ/mol and second ionization energy is 1957.9 kJ/mol .

 

by conservation of energy, (work done by battery ) =ionisation energy

 

qV= E_1

 

(1.6*10^-19 C) V=745.5*10^3 J / 6.02*10^23 particles (for the first ionisation energy)

 

Which gives about V=7.7 volts, something your apparatus did not provide, and this is the work done just on one copper atom, neglecting the electric potential of other protons and electrons, and this energy is just enough to provide it to escape the pull of it's parent proton.

Edited August 11, 201312 yr by Mellinia

And how does/would air act as an insulator when it is 7314 times less dense than copper?

 

And air is not a solid or a structured solid like concrete and plastic and ice.

Air is voluminous. The "electrons" of the normal theory would go between the air or through the air like x-rays and radiation from "radioactive" substances.

Well, you seem to have got something right- probability by accident.

The "electrons" would go through the air like radiation from "radioactive" substances"

That's probably more or less true.

Electrons carrying a million volts worth of energy have a range in air of the order of inches.

With just a few volts, they don't get far.

 

A vacuum is an insulator, and is infinitely less dense than copper. That would be because density is not a characteristic of a conductor vs insulator.

 

As Mellinia has noted, the characteristic you need is free electrons. Air becomes a conductor once you achieve breakdown voltage, where you can ionize molecules which give you — ta daa! — free electrons.

Makes sense.

On these sites:


http://phy214uhart.wikispaces.com/Ma...ue+To+Currents

and

http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2000fa.../solenoid.html



It says that a magnetic field (force) only depends on turns, "length", and a few variables that aren't explained at all.

It is not (volts times amps)/distance or (volts times amps)/(speed times time).

Now, since energy is force multiplied by distance (times cosine theta), this would be the source of the over unity.

On these sites:

 

 

http://phy214uhart.wikispaces.com/Ma...ue+To+Currents

 

and

 

http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2000fa.../solenoid.html

 

 

 

It says that a magnetic field (force) only depends on turns, "length", and a few variables that aren't explained at all.

 

It is not (volts times amps)/distance or (volts times amps)/(speed times time).

 

Now, since energy is force multiplied by distance (times cosine theta), this would be the source of the over unity.

 

You might want to review Faraday's law and Ampere's Law for that.

"Is Current Electricity Theory Wrong?"

Apparently not