Terms and Definitions

[mbrownn]

Defining terms might be interesting if not useful. Even if "we" have defied terms, others will not use them. When someone makes a claim of X in and multiples of X out, that is the time to ask questions and define parameters. for example an aircon has a COP of 10 but only when electrical watts are counted as the input and heat as the output; we all know that the heat input is a real input but because that is provided "free" by the environment it is not used in the COP calculation.

All terms used by people are open to personal interpretation so when a claim looks interesting or outrageous then we have to set the parameters.

I agree that Unity is the natural state of things, ALL things considered

[Farmhand]

This is what I mean, This is words from a Nobel prize winner, Spreading
disinformation already. Unbelievable. He should be sacked, they take the prize
money, then immediately spread their opinions as truths. 1.5 million, I think, who
puts up the prize money (follow the money). If all the energy is sucked out of
the universe I have two questions.

Where is the energy sucked to ?

What is exerting the sucking force to do that ?

I am shocked. It's all lies. That one statement discredits the man as a kook
as far as I am concerned.

All the energy sucked out of the universe. Utter tripe.

How's this sound ; E=M .

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/sc...obel.html?_r=3

If the universe continues accelerating, astronomers say, rather than
coasting gently into the night, distant galaxies will eventually be moving apart
so quickly that they cannot communicate with one another and all the
energy will be sucked out of the universe.

If nothing had a definition there would be no understanding. If i said to the
butcher I want a kilogram of meat and a kilogram was not defined he could
give me any amount and just say that's a kilogram.

Definitions are everything, definitions don't set boundaries to restrict
anything,
all a definition does is give a word a definite or specific meaning.

Seems the nobel winner needs to read the definition of energy.

Who do we show that quote to to embarrass him.

Cheers

P.S. They look at exploding stars and come to the conclusion the universe is all expanding the same as an exploding star. Great science. NOT.

[Shadesz]

Farmhand, you might find this funny too...

Science never sucks

It is true, science never sucks! Science can push and pull, but it will never suck anything. The key is the concept of pressure, pressures like to always be equal and will try just about anything that there is to get that way. This desire can produce those pushes and pulls, but once again, it will never suck.

looks like he was wrong from the start.

[Iotayodi]

This is words from a Nobel prize winner

Actually 3 of them.

[Farmhand]

Actually 3 of them.

Next thing they'll be telling us it's our fault the Universe is expanding so fast and we need to pay them to find a way to slow it down.

Or that it is being sucked into another parallel Universe or pushed. But by what ?

[citfta]

I have a question. In this quote there is a statement that voltage is the speed of electrons flowing through a wire. This is the second time in the last month I have read that on this forum. Where did that idea come from? I have worked in electronics for over fifty years and I never heard that one before. In the real world of electronics voltage is defined as the force that moves the electrons. Electrons move at a fixed speed depending upon the material, the same as light. If you increase the voltage you move more electrons you do NOT make them move faster. If someone can show me some real data that proves me wrong then I will retract my statement.

One of the major problems I have seen on this and other FE forums is that some people want to impress everyone with their great theories when they haven't even gone to the trouble to learn the basics first. There are a lot of free electronic and electrical classes and forums on the internet. Take the time and learn the basics then you wouldn't have to wonder what something meant. I realize that in the FE world there are a lot of conflicting ideas and terms. I am not really talking about those. I am referring to the normal language used in electronics. As an example I see on here people referring to a transistor being open. It appears from what they are saying they are talking about a transistor that is turned on. In the real world an open transistor is one that is burned out. In normal use a transistor is either on or off or somewhere in between. A bad transistor is open or shorted. this is just one example of the kinds of things a very basic education in electronics could teach you. Then you could discuss with accuracy a problem you are having with your circuit. Sorry for the rant, but I agree with Farmhand we need some clear definitions of terms and a lot of them have already been established if people would just take the time to study a little.

Definitions are our boundaries, if you want to expand your boundaries start with your definitions. A definition by definition (no pun intended ) restricts what we observe or how we interpret what we observe. If I say that voltage is the speed of electrons flowing through a wire and amperes are the quantity of electrons flowing through a wire and then say voltage is the consumption or disappearance of magnetic lines of force and current is the consumption or disappearance of electrostatic lines of force these 4 definitions of 2 different phenomena describe the phenomena completely different using completely different concepts which evoke completely different ideas which leads to a entirely different understanding of how the thing we are describing behaves with the environment around it.

Raui

Respectfully, Carroll

[Raui]

I have a question. In this quote there is a statement that voltage is the speed of electrons flowing through a wire. This is the second time in the last month I have read that on this forum. Where did that idea come from? I have worked in electronics for over fifty years and I never heard that one before. In the real world of electronics voltage is defined as the force that moves the electrons. Electrons move at a fixed speed depending upon the material, the same as light. If you increase the voltage you move more electrons you do NOT make them move faster. If someone can show me some real data that proves me wrong then I will retract my statement.

One of the major problems I have seen on this and other FE forums is that some people want to impress everyone with their great theories when they haven't even gone to the trouble to learn the basics first. There are a lot of free electronic and electrical classes and forums on the internet. Take the time and learn the basics then you wouldn't have to wonder what something meant. I realize that in the FE world there are a lot of conflicting ideas and terms. I am not really talking about those. I am referring to the normal language used in electronics. As an example I see on here people referring to a transistor being open. It appears from what they are saying they are talking about a transistor that is turned on. In the real world an open transistor is one that is burned out. In normal use a transistor is either on or off or somewhere in between. A bad transistor is open or shorted. this is just one example of the kinds of things a very basic education in electronics could teach you. Then you could discuss with accuracy a problem you are having with your circuit. Sorry for the rant, but I agree with Farmhand we need some clear definitions of terms and a lot of them have already been established if people would just take the time to study a little.





Respectfully, Carroll

I can appreciate your point Carroll, all I was trying to do was give 2 different opinions to what constitutes electricity and how our operating definition can greatly affect the way we deal what we are defining. I wasn't saying any definition I gave was the right one, I'm sorry I should have made my point more clear.

However I'm not 100% sure that the definition you gave for voltage is correct either. The conventional definition of current is the amount of charge passing through a point of a particular circuit. Quantities of charge are said, at least from a conventional point of view, to originate in charged particles and in the case of electricity most believe these particles to be electrons. So it can be said that current is the amount of electrons passing through a particular point of a circuit over a period of time.

To answer the question you asked though I will partly refer to the definition you gave that voltage is the force that acts upon the electrons in the conductor causing them to move. A force is made up of a mass and an acceleration. Increase the force on an electron and since it's still the same mass, being the mass of an electron, it will experience a greater acceleration or greater speed than when the voltage was smaller. So I probably should have said that voltage is the acceleration of electrons or even the definition you gave being the force that acts upon the electrons but in reality they result in the same thing, that is the acceleration and therefore speed increases with applied voltage. The Cathode Ray Tube in an old television set demonstrates that applied voltage accelerates electrons (change of velocity) (albeit this time in a vacuum)

I am completely self-taught so I don't know all the ins and outs of conventional theory (I am doing electromag in physics after the break though) so my understanding could be inadequate but I see no flaw in my logic above. I love constructive critism of the ideas I have of electricity so thank you for bringing the point up. Like I said before though, the definitions I gave were only meant to show how different definitions of the same thing can have you treating the defined thing completely different.

Raui

[Farmhand]

So is this definition OK ?

Voltage Definition

Definition: Voltage is a representation of the electric potential energy per unit charge. If a unit of electrical charge were placed in a location, the voltage indicates the potential energy of it at that point. In other words, it is a measurement of the energy contained within an electric field, or an electric circuit, at a given point.
Voltage is a scalar quantity. The SI unit of voltage is the volt, such that 1 volt = 1 joule/coulomb.

I think the main point with the voltage is it a "measure" or representation.
Not an actual.

I'll try to keep track the agreed definitions once agreeable enough in a list in the
first post.

How about EMF ? Will we discuss that too ? Please. Later.

[Raui]

So is this definition OK ?

Voltage Definition



I think the main point with the voltage is it a "measure" or representation.
Not an actual.

I'll try to keep track the agreed definitions once agreeable enough in a list in the
first post.

How about EMF ? Will we discuss that too ? Please. Later.

Well I like that definition because it deals with the phenomena in terms of the fields but that could be just me. I do think representation is a better word for voltage since, atleast according to conventional physics, we don't have a clue what electricity actually is, only how it behaves in the situations we've subjected it to thus far.

Raui

[Farmhand]

Electromotive Force : emf

OK so this one looks correct, my bold on some parts I thought interesting.

This one is a useful one to understand I think.

EMF Definition

Electromotive force
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Electromagnetism

In physics, electromotive force, emf (seldom capitalized), or electromotance (denoted ε and measured in volts) refers to voltage generated by a battery or by the magnetic force according to Faraday's Law, which states that a time varying magnetic field will induce an electric current.[1]
It is important to note that the electromotive "force" is not a force in the classical physics sense—as can be seen in the fact that it is measured in volts and not newtons. Formally, emf is the external work expended per unit of charge to produce an electric potential difference across two open-circuited terminals.[2][3] The electric potential difference produced is created by separating positive and negative charges, thereby generating an electric field.[4][5] The created electrical potential difference drives current flow if a circuit is attached to the source of emf. When current flows, however, the voltage across the terminals of the source of emf is no longer the open-circuit value, due to voltage drops inside the device due to its internal resistance.
Devices that can provide emf include electrochemical cells, thermoelectric devices, solar cells, electrical generators, transformers, and even Van de Graaff generators.[2][6] In nature, emf is generated whenever magnetic field fluctuations occur through a surface. An example for this is the varying Earth magnetic field during a geomagnetic storm, acting on anything on the surface of the planet, like an extended electrical grid.
In the case of a battery, charge separation that gives rise to a voltage difference is accomplished by chemical reactions at the electrodes;[5] a voltaic cell can be thought of as having a "charge pump" of atomic dimensions at each electrode, that is:[7]
A source of emf can be thought of as a kind of charge pump that acts to move positive charge from a point of low potential through its interior to a point of high potential. … By chemical, mechanical or other means, the source of emf performs work dW on that charge to move it to the high potential terminal. The emf ℰ of the source is defined as the work dW done per charge dq: ℰ = dW/dq.

If I post a definition that anyone considers incorrect please say so so we can
discuss it and possibly change it.

P.S. I wonder how much Natural emf is generated in the grid system already.

This from the quote above.

In nature, emf is generated whenever magnetic field fluctuations occur through a surface. An example for this is the varying Earth magnetic field during a geomagnetic storm, acting on anything on the surface of the planet, like an extended electrical grid.

.

[boguslaw]

Raui is right about voltage and current. Electrons can move really fast in vacuum tubes but in wire they are slow. In fact I believe electrons as particles exists only in pure vacuum - exactly like Tesla said. In all other cases they are just standing or stationary or wave packets or orbitals. The material factor like crystal structure limit speed of electrons very tightly and it is called resistance. In fact current can be amount of electrons per time factor or faster electrons = compressed time factor. The last one can be made using particle accelerators IMHO

[Farmhand]

Electrical current

Electrical Current

Definition: Electrical current is a measure of the amount of electrical charge transferred per unit time. It represents the flow of electrons through a conductive material.
Current is a scalar quantity (though in circuit analysis, the direction of current is relevant). The SI unit of electrical current is the ampere, defined as 1 coulomb/second.

OK electrical current is a measure of the amount of electrical charge transferred per unit of time. It represents the flow of electrons through a conductive material.

So current is a "measure" or a representation.

OK so no need to use the word "electron" we can do without it in my opinion.

We can just say "unit of charge", now voltage is a measure as well.

Do we really have voltage a measure causing current another measure ?
A measurement causing a measurement,

I think we cut a corner, there is more to it.

Voltage is a representation of the electric potential energy per unit charge.

Electrical current is a measure of the amount of electrical charge transferred per unit time.

We can argue this but I think if the words of a good definition are understood in context it should be self explanatory.

So voltage measures the electric potential energy per unit of charge and current is the amount of electrical charge transferred over a unit of time.

The transfer of charge or the flow of "current" is caused by the application of the potential energy to the circuit, which is measured as energy per unit of charge "voltage".

Really there is no need for the word electron.

Electrical current is a measurement and only as real as a measurement can be.

Seems to me it's all about that "unit of charge".

I think we really need to differentiate between measurements or representations and things.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Actually I think this definition.

Definition: Electrical current is a measure of the amount of electrical charge transferred per unit time. It represents the flow of electrons through a conductive material.
Current is a scalar quantity (though in circuit analysis, the direction of current is relevant). The SI unit of electrical current is the ampere, defined as 1 coulomb/second.

Should read just like this. for less confusion.

Electrical current is a measure of the amount of electrical charge transferred per unit time. It represents the flow of charge through a conductive material.

I think the whole electron thing looks bogus to me. No offence Boguslaw. I think I agree with Tesla and you.

Boguslaw said

I believe electrons as particles exists only in pure vacuum - exactly like Tesla said. In all other cases they are just standing or stationary or wave packets or orbitals.

What do others think ?
..

[Farmhand]

Who actually invented and applied the word electron to a definition ?

I think that might be important. Where did it come from ?

[Raui]

I believe it was Joseph John Thompson, although I think you'll find him referenced as J.J Thompson most places, who 'discovered' the electron. Here is a book on his views of electricity which Eric Dollard has mentioned before; Electricity and Matter

I think it's worth noting that, according to Eric, Thompson believe that there are 1000s of electrons in a hydrogen atom not just 1. I haven't read too much of Thompson's work so I can't comment too much but I plan to when I get more spare time.

Edit: Sorry I didn't read what you said properly. It was George Johnstone Stoney who suggested the name 'electron' for the fundamental unit of charge, particle or not.
Raui