Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass
From: tadchem (tadchemNOSPAM_at_comcast.net)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: Cecil Moore: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Previous message: Gregory Poon: "Re: Journals Call for Papers"
- In reply to: Guck: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Next in thread: Cecil Moore: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:16:01 +0000 (UTC)
"Guck" <marcus4767@canada.com> wrote in message
news:e97cd51a.0409111417.594510f6@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> What bothers me is that old-fashioned idea of electricity being the
> flow of electrons thru a wire from a negative terminal of EMF to the
> positive terminal. Obviously electricity is a flow of energy, it
> doesn't seem realisitic to imagine that actual physical electrons
> travel thru the wire.
But they do. If electronics courses still taught vacuum tube operation,
that would be a more obvious fact. The fact that electrons *physically*
travel down the wire was demonstrated by Hittorf:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CathodeRay.html
using a variation of the Cathode Ray Tube:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CathodeRayTube.html
> It's like light-
> light is carried by photons, light is carried by an energy
> wave/particle
> which has no mass ,
Remember this: PHOTONS HAVE NO MASS. PHOTONS HAVE NO CHARGE. PHOTONS MOVE
AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT.
> so it must be the same with electricity, because
> electricity is supposed to be the same wave/particle composition as
> light, simply at a different frequency or wavelength. Light and
> electricty are both the same- they are both radiation energies.
ELECTRONS HAVE MASS. ELECTRONS HAVE CHARGE. ELECTRONS MOVE SLOWER THAN
PHOTONS.
Photons and electrons are NOT the same.
> So therefore electrons should not be considered as leptons or
> fundamental particles because in electricity flow, the negative
> charge component of the electron must be able to disassociate into a
> "photon" type energy component which is what travels through the wire.
ELECTRONS CANNOT "DISSOCIATE."
In a wire, the electrical *energy* is carried by the *motion* of electrons
through the wire in much the same manner as sound *energy* is carried by the
*motion* of atoms and molecules in a material medium - the energy travels
MUCH faster than the component carriers.
Each carrier (atom, molecule, or electron, as the case may be) moves at its
own velocity (which is a function of the temperature!) until it bumps into
another and transfers its momentum to the next at a much higher speed.
Because of the difference in the positions of the centers of the two
carriers (they are not infinitesimally small) this means the momentum gets a
boost of one particle diameter every time there is a collision .
In 8th grade science class we set up three lines of dominoes side-by-side:
they were all the same length - about 5 meters. The first line was set up
"normally" with a spacing of about 2 domino thicknesses between each pair,
and represented the open spacing of a "gas." The second line was set up
with a spacing of one domino thickness, and represented the closer spacing
of a solid or liquid. The third line was set up with the dominos touching
each other, and represented the close packing of the unbound ("valence")
electrons in a solid crystal of a metal. (Yes, they understood about bound
and unbound electrons in metals back then.)
All three were started at the same time in the same way - one domino
standing a domino's-width away from the end of the line was tipper over onto
the first domino in line. The first domino line took about 3 seconds to
fall (according to the "official timer" - a student with a stopwatch). The
second string fell so fast that the timing was not very reliable, but all
observers agreed that it was a lot faster than the first. The third string
fell so fast that the timer couldn't even get the stopwatch started before
it was over.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
- Next message: Cecil Moore: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Previous message: Gregory Poon: "Re: Journals Call for Papers"
- In reply to: Guck: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Next in thread: Cecil Moore: "Re: experimental verification of electromagnetic mass"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
