What is Electric Current?

[Harvey]

Please explain more what you mean with long water dropper or a hydro electric generator. Hm. maybe equal same Energy?
But i am more interested, when you use instead a bulb, what makes a flash or even a bit lit,
will the Water ever run out of molecules or charge, because you convert actuall Energy into Light and heat or will it works allways.

About this movement, i dont want think more about it, because anything makes turns, and you never know, what happens really inside.

But it seems its allways a certain Amount, what is moved with a certain amount of Force.
Like a Water Dropper with a Cap will have lesser Sparks but more stronger,
without Cap the opposite. Its only the Amount, what is there, to make a action.

I only asked that question to encourage thoughts surrounding efficiency of conversion. Suppose that a long column of water negatively charged was allowed to fall through the center of an electric coil just as long. And at the same time a long column of positively charged water did the same in another coil and then, at the bottom of the dam, both are collected in separate pools. Since no real impedance to the flow exists, but a charge is moving through the center of the coil (and must have a magnetic field around it which passes through the coils) then EMF must be produced in the coils. Also, at the end, we have two pools of oppositely charged water and this too represents an EMF value between them (and each to zero as well I might add). So the question posed then, is this more efficient since it has little or no restriction to motion and therefore low heat loss as compared to a standard hydroelectric plant where the water pressure is used to push mechanical turbines to generate power?

It would be interesting to do a test, even with city water pressure, to see which is more efficient - turning a turbine generator, or the Kelvin method for the same forces.

[Joit]

Harvey for that Case, i think the Water Dropper is more efficient, because when you compare Testdevices, they use 2 Pots of Water, and can create couple Sparks.
Try that with a Waterturbine, to trow 2 Pots Water over it.
And i now what i talk about, because i build a small Water wheel for Freinds last Week, lol, there is the Magnet inside the Coils, what i turned with the Drill.
And its more efficient, to turn the Magnet inside, as have the Coils outside faced to the Magnet.
But i think, the Way of store and use this Energy is somehow difficult,
you get DC from a Dropper, High Voltage, about 10k and more, you would maybe need another Turbine, what you can run with it, to create new Energy,
and a Wife, wich holds the Rights for a Dam. ...
but you make me think, if i should not replace my small Waterwheel with a Dropper for my Friend, because they have a Spring close

[Joit]

Just wanna add this Picture here,

The Description is, The Drops are build steady at the same Size and same Time,
but at falling down theyr distance increase close quadratic.

[Harvey]

Yes, that picture clearly shows gravitational acceleration of the drops.


Now, how to efficiently improve on Lord Kelvin's system to help the positive and negative ions to be routed properly?

The ions are attracted to that stream that is already having a particular charge, but perhaps we can seed that preemptively to force a particular charge early.

If we have a PVC Tee and overlay the axial extensions with a copper sleeve and then split a copper sleeve lengthwise for the perpendicular extension (and make that long to hold a good volume of water), then we can charge each half with a different charge. By connecting the left parallel extension, to the left side half of the split piece on the perpendicular, and the right parallel extension to the right side half of the split piece, then the copper can be charged, say the left would be positive and the right would be negative. So, then, the vertical perpendicular would appear to be polarized all along its length. This makes a cylindrical capacitor. It is composed thus:

+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -
+ Cu | PVC | Water | PVC | Cu -

Now we have to analyze what we have learned from the MIT lessons. The PVC causes an open surface to exist. It is closed through its cross section, but it is open on the ends. Therefore, the inside of the pipe does not have to be zero, and thus we can polarize the water with the resulting E field as we pass it through between the copper plates. When the water reaches the Tee intersection, it will naturally take the path according to its charge and by then it will have separated (hopefully) to accomplish this. Q. What is the best way to pre-charge the plates? Are the rings no longer necessary with this configuration?

Group Consideration: How can a special vortex capacitor be made that separates the water such that the outside layer is positive and the inside layer is negative? What type of pipe would this require? Would running the water through such a pipe reduce it's friction and make it more efficient?

How could a fully enclosed system be made that uses solar energy to elevate the water back to the top reservoir after is is fully neutralized? Would it be more efficient than solar cells? How could the high voltage DC be converted to 120V or 240V AC efficiently? How many different energy conversions occur through out a complete water cycle?

[boguslaw]

question : what cause electric energy to appear ? what is the Poynting flow around circuit wire ? what is the relation between electric power and electric current ? can we amplify or multiply electric energy flowing around wire ?

[Harvey]

question : what cause electric energy to appear ? what is the Poynting flow around circuit wire ? what is the relation between electric power and electric current ? can we amplify or multiply electric energy flowing around wire ?

what cause electric energy to appear ?

As is true for any form of energy, a differential must exist within the primary force under consideration. For example, the gravitational force wishes to collapse all matter into a single point - or more specifically into non-matter. Therefore, if any distance between one part of matter and another exists, then gravitational potential energy exists between them. Pay careful attention to what this means. When matter is formed at any distance from other matter, it instantly represents gravitational energy. Conversely, the destruction of matter at any given point represents a sudden loss in gravitational energy. Therefore, when an electron (matter) and a positron (matter) annihilate each other, there is a loss of gravitational energy not only between them, but between each of them and every other mass in the universe. So that energy is converted to another form.

So, for electric energy to appear, there must occur a conversion of one form of energy to a separation of charges. The separation of charges represents work being done and therefore energy is expended (converted) to cause the separation. Just like lifting a weight above your head. If there were a path for that weight to reach your toes, I'm sure it would travel there. The energy to make that happen is stored in it's elevation, or separation from the Earth. Similarly, when an electrically charged particle is separated from another of opposite polarity, if there is a path for them to connect through they will. There are many ways to separate electric charges. The most common are by chemical or electromagnetic means. But both of these require that energy be expended cause the separation. The vast majority of such energy comes from our sun if you trace it back that far - and if you go even farther you will end up at God himself as he is the root source for all energy in the universe.

what is the Poynting flow around circuit wire ?

First of all, it is important to realize that the Poynting Vector does not properly apply to static fields (see this link). It is only properly linked to changing EM fields. It represents the direction and magnitude for moving energy and is essentially the cross product of the changing E field and the changing H field. This vector is specifically associated with conservation of energy.

what is the relation between electric power and electric current ?

Electric Power (Watt) is the product of Voltage and Current (P = EI). If the current does not flow through a resistance, then the power is only apparent, it does not do any work and is returned to the source. This is why transformers are rated in Volt-Amps rather than Watts. If voltage or current are zero, you have zero power. Let's consider a voltage source which does not allow any charge movement at its location - we call this static voltage. Let say that voltage is very high, say 1 million volts (typical Van de Graff). Now let's say we bring a balloon with an opposite charge into that source's field of influence, it's E field. We observe work being done as the balloon moves toward the device. At first glance we may think that this is a breakdown in the power law because we don't recognize how current is flowing. But remember, current is defined as charge in motion. So as the balloon moves, charges are moving and this represents current. If the charges on the balloon represent one millionth of an amp, then we can say 1 watt of power was used to move the balloon. 1,000,000V x 0.000001A = 1W.

can we amplify or multiply electric energy flowing around wire ?

Of course. This is what amplifiers do. But it is important to understand that this process comes at the expense of the source power. Imagine the car audio system fully outfitted with 5,000W of raw audio power. Do you think your batteries from your remote control can power those amplifiers? No, the power must come from a source with 'deep pockets' - like a pair of 1,000 Ah Marine batteries in parallel. And even then it will give you less than 4 hours usable in that Amp. Another method is to trade time for power. This is what Tesla did with his magnifying transmitter. He was able to boost both the voltage and the amps (watts) by limiting the pulse width of the power spike. For example, a 10V 10A (100W) spike 10s long represents 1000 Watt-Seconds ( a watt-second is a Joule). Now, if we take that same energy and concentrate it in only 1 second, we now have a 1000W watt spike. So we have amplified our power by a factor of 10, but the energy is the same and we have 9 seconds of dead time.

[Schpankme]

and if you go even farther you will end up at God himself as he is the root source for all energy in the universe.

Which God are you talking about; I'd really like to meet her?

Schpankme

"I've Converted To EVERY Religion (Just In Case)." -- Edward Current

[Harvey]

Which God are you talking about; I'd really like to meet her?

Schpankme

"I've Converted To EVERY Religion (Just In Case)." -- Edward Current

By His own words he refers to himself in the Masculine form, therefore we must conclude that your post was an attempt to instigate and argument and will be henceforth reported as such.

[Schpankme]

By His own words
he refers to himself in the Masculine form,

...your post was an attempt to instigate and argument
and will be henceforth reported as such.

Harvey,

Who gave you permission to decide for me, or anyone else, what god or gods to worship (male or female)?

Who told you that God was a Man?

Do you talk to God(s) Harvey?

When you say, "By His own words", what words of God are you referring to?

Why do you require God in your "What is Electric Current thread?


Your God comment was totally off topic and fair game; your reply to my questions was not satisfactory answered.


How many Gods are there ?

Estimating N from population

It is estimated that there are 6,700,000,000 people currently living on the Earth and the total number of people who ever lived is 102,000,000,000 (102 billion or 102 thousand million depending on where you come from). It could be argued that everyone's idea of god is different, so this is N. Or, at least, this could be used as an upper bound for N, except that many people were (or are) polytheists. However, if we accept there would be (sometimes quite large) groupings of people with essentially the same religious beliefs, this would lower the estimate for N.

If these two effects roughly cancel each other out, then N = 102,000,000,000 may be a good starting estimate.

That's a lot of gods.
edit Estimating N from religions

Adherents.com claims to have figures for 4,200 religious groups currently existing on Earth.

Using the ratio of current population to the total number of people who have ever lived, we get an estimate of 63,000 religious groups throughout human history. (Only Homo sapiens' religions are being considered. It may well be that other hominids believed in god or gods, but it would be pure guesswork to estimate the number of gods they believed in.)

The modern dominant (that is, have the most adherents) religions are monotheistic, but they are few in number. Wikipedia lists 309 Hindu deities. The ancient Hittites claimed to have 1000 deities in their pantheon. So for a rough estimate of the average number of deities per religion, we'll take the average of these 3 figures, giving 440 deities per religion.

This gives an estimate of N = 28,000,000

YouTube - I've Converted To EVERY Religion (Just In Case)

Schpankme

"...conflicted people pump each other up with heartwarming stories that promise eternal life, provided you do as you're told." -- Edward Current

[CatLady]

What?

I thought the topic of this thread was "What is Electric Current." I think its a good idea to keep on topic.

[boguslaw]

sorry,I meant : what is the connection between electrical energy being Poynting flow around wires and charge flow inside wire (electric current) ?

I realized that by electric power equation it is assumed that electric current is a reason for energy flow or current is caused by energy flow, both states that those too are interconnected IN THE CIRCUIT.
However I think that interconnection may be in power source only !
We have charge pump which forces charge imbalance and causing charge flow in wires and we have energy converter which generates Poynting flow.
In all our current devices those two are the same power source, but is that required ? Yes, in most cases probably it is required because I recall Tesla stated we could have a lot of different currents in the same wire and each one depends only on its power source.
Also Steven Mark (inventor of TPU) talked about cold cathode power vacuum triode and how he found low voltage current mixed with HV in grid.

But there must be something not so closely related, because I think that theory about wires with electric charge movement being a waveguide for electromagnetic energy is very nice one.

Finally there should be a way to separate charge pump from energy converter and tap EM energy from our Galaxy and Sun.
Tesla radiant energy converter patent from 1900 seems related but I would replace a capacitor there with an inductor and capacitor or rather bifila coil with resonant frequency matched with ambient EM natural source frequency (like Sun,Galaxy or Earth ambient sources).

[Joit]

Yes, that picture clearly shows gravitational acceleration of the drops.

I only find it quite interesting, that the acceleration is squared.
So, the nature Way from this acceleration is not linear, but squared?
And remember, all is tied together, gravity and the Field from a Coil.
I look allways for a gap, to use it, when i try to build something.

For Mrmagamp, i know, it comes late, about the Voltage,
If Voltage is only the dissipation, then, there should be anyhow still a flow or potential, that you can measure the Voltage.
Anyhow i think, it is not only a dissipation, because you allways need something what turns or move, in a way, without, you only have standing mass.
That is only, as far i know, in a storage like a Cap. But the Cap get 'moved' the charge into it too.

This Dropper Idea dont looks bad, maybe we can combine it with more Cells,
to increase a Value, either power or strenght, from it.
But at the Page, where i got the Picture from, it said, it need to be drops.
At the Case, when it is a Stream, then it makes a Short in the Cans and it dont build up charge.
Once, i build such a Thing with some Been cans and canulas, it did remeber anyhow at something like a Stoneage club, and didnt work at any Way.
Its maybe not a Thing, what you can easy build in a bit.
After it, i think, i did use the Cans complete for the upper Rings,
but maybe small one are far enough, because there is only the Charge seperation.

For an other Reason, i think, that is a good way to go, not to create a direct Flow,
where you got allways counter Forces, but seperate the Charge to build up Potentials.
When you look closer at a Bedini charger, then you see what i mean.

[Harvey]

sorry,I meant : what is the connection between electrical energy being Poynting flow around wires and charge flow inside wire (electric current) ?

I realized that by electric power equation it is assumed that electric current is a reason for energy flow or current is caused by energy flow, both states that those too are interconnected IN THE CIRCUIT.
However I think that interconnection may be in power source only !
We have charge pump which forces charge imbalance and causing charge flow in wires and we have energy converter which generates Poynting flow.
In all our current devices those two are the same power source, but is that required ? Yes, in most cases probably it is required because I recall Tesla stated we could have a lot of different currents in the same wire and each one depends only on its power source.
Also Steven Mark (inventor of TPU) talked about cold cathode power vacuum triode and how he found low voltage current mixed with HV in grid.

But there must be something not so closely related, because I think that theory about wires with electric charge movement being a waveguide for electromagnetic energy is very nice one.

Finally there should be a way to separate charge pump from energy converter and tap EM energy from our Galaxy and Sun.
Tesla radiant energy converter patent from 1900 seems related but I would replace a capacitor there with an inductor and capacitor or rather bifila coil with resonant frequency matched with ambient EM natural source frequency (like Sun,Galaxy or Earth ambient sources).

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your term "around". Could you clarify if you mean 'around' the circuit or 'around' the outside of the wire in free space?

To use a waveguide there must be a wave. To have a wave there must be a frequency. To have a frequency, there must be a change in value over time or distance or both. When a value does not change over time or distance it is considered to be static. Now, one could argue a variant speed and assign a frequency to that variation, but that would not relate, I don't think, to the constant charge value apart from some relativistic acceleration and deceleration factors. So we view a constant charge moving through time and space as having no frequency, and thus no wave. If you put a charge in your palm and an observer located at the center between the two foci of our planetary ellipse is able to see it and observe it's action - what will they observe? The charge is in motion, and it covers distance over time. What is more, as the charge moves away from the observer it would diminish is field strength and as it would move toward the observer it would increase in field strength according to the inverse square rule. The frequency of that action would be a sidereal day as the Earth rotates on its axis. There would also be an annual deviation in the strength as the charge moves through the apsides, relative of course to our observer. So the question arises as to whether or not the observer would detect at his location (with very good instrumentation) a magnetic variation from this apparently very low frequency changing field strength of what you would consider at your location as a static charge. Does a constant charge moving through space and time produce a magnetic field or not?

Do the same experiment with a truly circular path with no variations as you are in a ship orbiting the observer. Now with the charge field not changing relative to either you or the observer there is no wave. Let's turn the observer into a proton and that moving charge into an electron - so we are looking now at a hydrogen atom. Does the electron create a wave? Not as far as the Proton is concerned and not as far as the electron is concerned. But perhaps to an outside observer it does. such is the true case in matter. The electron field strength increases when it comes near another atom, and
decreases when it moves away - relative to that other atom. Therefore, it detects that wave and interacts with it. These sympathetic vibrations of repeated interdependent interaction are what we call zero point energy. When all of the thermal energy is removed from a material, that vibratory action still exists, and is unaffected by the immense drop in temperature. That vibration is a core reaction between matter, space and time. Now I will share a secret according to my own theory: The core vibration of the nucleus produces longitudinal spherical waves in space and time radiating from that nucleus. These waves find balance as standing waves surrounding the nucleus. The decompression zones are where the electrons orbit. This is why they must jump from one 'shell' to the next when their velocity exceeds the containment of the decompression zone they are in. Electrons that are forced to orbit in a compression zone, behave very badly and will convert some velocity to a photon so they may fall into a lower orbit. When the waves of space and time accumulate in phase and are electrically polarized, we call it a magnetic field. Space and time, interact with matter because matter displaces space and time.

The Poynting-Robertson Effect shows us a bit regarding observer role and also introduces us to changes in mass.

The Poynting Vector, outside of a conducting wire with variant current would simply be aiding us in understanding the EM radiation from that wire. In a transformer, we hope that all of the energy is transferred from the primary wire to the secondary wire. Perhaps the J.Edwards and T.K Saha, Power flow in transformers via the Poynting Vector will be of use to you.

Cheers,

[Harvey]

Hi Joit,

Yes it is squared. And this is a case of time being self referential. Something that is falling, is under a constant force, like pressing the accelerator pedal on your car to keep the RPM steady, it is (basically) a consistent force being applied and the car accelerates.

So, it is 9.8 meter per second that is the starting velocity. But the velocity increases each second as acceleration. So it is distance per time squared, or d/tē (see how time references itself here as t multiplied by t ) So we say that gravitational acceleration is nine point eight meters per second, per second to mean that each second that passes, our velocity increases by nine point eight meters per second. In mathematical terms, if P is our starting point or position, then velocity would be the first derivative of P with respects to time and acceleration would be the second derivative of P with respects to time. I like to use a drag race to illustrate four derivatives. With P being the starting line, P' is the velocity of the dragster at any point in time, P'' is the acceleration of the dragster, P''' is the change in acceleration during shifting, and P'''' is how fast that shifting happens. Each and ever case is a change in previous case. Velocity is a change in position over time, Acceleration is a change in velocity over time, Jerk is change in Acceleration, and P'''' (we don't really have a name for this) is a change in Jerk. So, if you know the rate of change for these things and when they begin, you can accurately determine precisely where the dragster will be at any given moment on the track.

In the case of the water drop, the acceleration is constant so you only need the second derivative (acceleration) from the initial position to determine where it will be in the photo. Acceleration is defined as Length divided by Time Squared. Or distance over time squared as in meters per second squared. So that is where the 'square' comes from.

Now, in reality, there is a third derivative active in gravitational attraction. This is because the force is not constant. The closer we get, the stronger the force. Because the force increases as the distance decreases we can expect the acceleration to increase as well. But this would only become meaningful when the distance covered would be far enough to reduce the force by a measurable amount. Therefore, a change in acceleration could be measured. I edited this twice because I know my calcs were wrong (I forgot to eat today and it is showing ) - but that would be a good exercise for the readers to do. At what altitude could we see a change in acceleration?

=======================================

Shorting out the stream of water.

If the water used was distilled with no conduction and the plumbing from left side to right side were electrically isolated, I think the danger of discharge would disappear. The worst that could happen then, is that discharge occurs inside the water and causes decomposition. If that were to occur, then you could collect the gases and they too would represent an energy source. I don't see a problem for a continuous stream provided the containers and plumbing are properly addressed to prevent conduction or dielectric breakdown.

Cheers,

[Schpankme]

And this is a case of time being self referential.

9.8 meter per second that is the starting velocity.

But the velocity increases each second as acceleration.

So it is distance per time squared, or d/tē

(see how time references itself here as t multiplied by t )

Velocity is a change in position over time,

Acceleration is a change in velocity over time

Jerk

(we
don't really have a name for this) is a change in Jerk.

Now, in reality,

I'd recommend hyphenating the word Jerk- for more importance; Off the top of my head.

"It is logically impossible for the t coordinate of an object to change because such a change is self-referential."

Schpankme

"Progress is at a stand still why were amused by those adept at manipulating math equations."