Bloody Google again... - Sinclair

This is a discussion on Bloody Google again... - Sinclair ; Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble: > "Bohus Kr?l" wrote ... >> >> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus >> ? > No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 60

Thread: Bloody Google again...

  1. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble:

    > "Bohus Kr?l" wrote ...
    >>
    >> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    >> ?


    > No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point to another.
    > One ampere of electric current is equal to about 6 billion billion electrons
    > per second flowing past a point.


    That's not entirely true...
    Bit more complicated than that I'm afraid.
    Electric current is the transfer of energy as a wave down the skin of a
    wire. Electrons themselves don't move very fast in a conductor... About
    walking pace in fact. The energy transfer is close to the speed of light.

    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  2. Re: Bloody Google again...

    On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:35:48 +0000, fuzzix wrote:

    >spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >> deKay did eloquently scribble:
    >>> Soni tempori elseu romani yeof helsforo nisson ol sefini ill des Sat, 26 Jan
    >>> 2008 01:59:55 -0800 (PST), sefini jorgo geanyet des mani yeof do
    >>> comp.sys.sinclair, yawatina tan reek esk korax1214@gmail.com fornis do
    >>> marikano es bono tan el:

    >>
    >>>> Yesterday I posted a reply (albeit a facetious one) to the "Kicking
    >>>> the bucket" thread. I got the "Your post was successful" indicator
    >>>> but the post is still, several hours later, not showing on Google.
    >>>> Has anyone else received it?
    >>>>
    >>>> This kind of thing makes even the flaky aioe look good...

    >>
    >>> The only "Kicking the Bucket" post I can see on The German Server is Eq's one
    >>> yesterday.

    >>
    >> Same here.

    >
    >ME TOO!



    AAOL!

  3. Re: Bloody Google again...

    wrote:

    > Electrons themselves don't move very fast in a conductor... About
    > walking pace in fact. The energy transfer is close to the speed of light.


    Yep. If electrons moved at the speed of light from a battery to a
    circuit you would *see* the battery shrink .-D

    --
    | ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. Strattinare
    | |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | Se/quando c'e', c'e'
    | |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ |
    | /_/ /_/ | *Si vis pacem, para papunzi

  4. Re: Bloody Google again...

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    > Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble:
    >
    >> "Bohus Kr?l" wrote ...
    >>> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    >>> ?

    >
    >> No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point to another.
    >> One ampere of electric current is equal to about 6 billion billion electrons
    >> per second flowing past a point.

    >
    > That's not entirely true...
    > Bit more complicated than that I'm afraid.
    > Electric current is the transfer of energy as a wave down the skin of a
    > wire. Electrons themselves don't move very fast in a conductor... About
    > walking pace in fact. The energy transfer is close to the speed of light.
    >

    about two thirds the speed of light actually

    --
    link my boring website http://alistairsserver.no-ip.org/

  5. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Alistair C did eloquently scribble:
    > spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >> Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble:
    >>
    >>> "Bohus Kr?l" wrote ...
    >>>> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    >>>> ?

    >>
    >>> No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point to another.
    >>> One ampere of electric current is equal to about 6 billion billion electrons
    >>> per second flowing past a point.

    >>
    >> That's not entirely true...
    >> Bit more complicated than that I'm afraid.
    >> Electric current is the transfer of energy as a wave down the skin of a
    >> wire. Electrons themselves don't move very fast in a conductor... About
    >> walking pace in fact. The energy transfer is close to the speed of light.
    >>

    > about two thirds the speed of light actually


    Compared to walking pace, close enough.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  6. Re: Bloody Google again...


    "Ian Rawlings" wrote ...

    > On 2008-01-27, Sam Gillett wrote:
    >
    >> No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point to another.
    >> One ampere of electric current is equal to about 6 billion billion
    >> electrons per second flowing past a point.

    >
    > That's if electrons actually flow, rather than just existing in an
    > unobservable quantum field..


    According to generally accepted theory electrons sort of jump from atom to
    atom. When an electron arrives at an atom another electron is dislodged from
    that atom and jumps to the next atom, and so on, and so on.
    --
    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett

    Why is the third hand on a watch
    called the second hand?




  7. Re: Bloody Google again...


    "Bohus Kral" wrote ...
    >
    > "Sam Gillett" napmsal
    >
    >> As electrons flow from negative to positive, and electric current is the
    >> flow of electrons, electricity also flows from negative to positive.

    >
    > Yes, I was pointing to the fact, that circuit schemes of semiconductors are
    > drawn counter way (diode, transistor, capacitor)


    When we get into semiconductors we have to contend with hole flow as well as
    electron flow. That is when things get _really_ complicated!
    --
    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett

    Change is inevitable,
    except from vending machines!




  8. Re: Bloody Google again...


    wrote ...

    > Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble:
    >
    >> "Bohus Kr?l" wrote ...
    >>>
    >>> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to
    >>> minus
    >>> ?

    >
    >> No. Electric current is the flow of electrons from one point to another.
    >> One ampere of electric current is equal to about 6 billion billion
    >> electrons per second flowing past a point.

    >
    > That's not entirely true...
    > Bit more complicated than that I'm afraid.
    > Electric current is the transfer of energy as a wave down the skin of a
    > wire. Electrons themselves don't move very fast in a conductor... About
    > walking pace in fact. The energy transfer is close to the speed of light.


    That is not entirely true either.

    While a limited "skin effect" may exist at extremely high frequencies
    (gigahertz range), the entire cross-section of the conductor is utilized for
    current flow at lower frequencies.

    And, if your electrons move that slowly, you have some very lazy electrons...
    or maybe they have been smoking pot and are too stoned to move faster. ;-)
    --
    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett

    If you don't pay your exorcist,
    will you become repossessed?




  9. Re: Bloody Google again...


    "Sam Gillett" napísal

    > According to generally accepted theory electrons sort of jump from atom to
    > atom. When an electron arrives at an atom another electron is dislodged
    > from
    > that atom and jumps to the next atom, and so on, and so on.


    Here appears a question where I am still not clear on. Imagine two conductor
    wires of same conducting parameters, but one is 10cm long and second is 10km
    long. If you attach to edges of 10cm wire a battery, the electricity starts
    to flow in very short time. When you attach a battery to a 10km one, the
    electricity starts to flow in this wire in longer time as in 10cm one. I was
    considering, that this is caused by amount of electrons between plus and
    minus edges of wire. Nobody cannot explain it better, as people from brange
    are still talking about some impedance and when I am asking them what does
    it mean, they cannot explain it. Can you explain it without impedance ? I am
    thinking that way, that the information between plus and minus edge of 10km
    wire that there has been attached battery is carried by atoms within 10km
    wire that have to pass their electrons to flow from minus to plus. And as
    longer the conductor, as higher amount of electrons that have to start
    flowing and thus the time of electric signal is increasing.

    B


  10. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Sam Gillett did eloquently scribble:
    > While a limited "skin effect" may exist at extremely high frequencies
    > (gigahertz range), the entire cross-section of the conductor is utilized for
    > current flow at lower frequencies.


    > And, if your electrons move that slowly, you have some very lazy electrons...
    > or maybe they have been smoking pot and are too stoned to move faster. ;-)


    Sorry...But looking at it from end to end of the wire, electrons move even
    slower than walking pace. It can be as slow as 1 meter per hour.
    (look up "electron drift speed")

    Oh, they might zip along at a fair rate of knots in the wire, but they're
    not travelling in a uniform direction.
    --
    | |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
    | |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
    | in |good to you so far... |
    | Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

  11. Re: Bloody Google again...

    On 2008-01-28, Sam Gillett wrote:

    > According to generally accepted theory electrons sort of jump from atom to
    > atom. When an electron arrives at an atom another electron is dislodged from
    > that atom and jumps to the next atom, and so on, and so on.


    That as far as I am aware is a working model rather than an accurate
    depiction of electrons, last I'd read they were reckoned to fill the
    atom in a sort of field that was hard to explain. Quantum physics has
    shown that things are a lot more odd than was at first thought and the
    original idea of atoms having circulating electrons like miniature
    planets orbiting the nucleus seems to have fallen by the wayside
    although it still works as a model for most uses.

    --
    Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

  12. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Ian Rawlings wrote:

    > But that's how the internets work! It's all tubes, last time I had an
    > internet problem, I dipped my ADSL line in Mr. Muscle Drain Cleaner,
    > works a treat now although my web pages were bleached white for a
    > while.


    Leave it to css - to turn a joke into a perfectly sensible discussion
    and back to a, erm, less boring thing.

    --
    | ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. Strattinare
    | |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | Se/quando c'e', c'e'
    | |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ |
    | /_/ /_/ | *Si vis pacem, para papunzi

  13. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Sam Gillett wrote:

    > According to generally accepted theory electrons sort of jump from atom to
    > atom.


    Uhm. Shouldn't it be that an electron vibrating in its orbit hits a near
    electron of the next atom, thus transferring its energy down the wire?
    I seem to remember something like that from my school days. I wasn't
    really paying attention when they explained this, that's why I always
    fry my circuits.

    --
    | ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. Strattinare
    | |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | Se/quando c'e', c'e'
    | |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ |
    | /_/ /_/ | *Si vis pacem, para papunzi

  14. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Bohus Král wrote:

    > "Biggo" napísal v správe
    > > modify your standard direct universe into an alternate one by removing a
    > > couple diodes and capacitors.

    >
    > Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    > ?


    Naah. You'll just end up with an *inverted* universe where plus is minus
    and minus is plus, just like in some kind of ill religion or something.

    --
    | ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. Strattinare
    | |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | Se/quando c'e', c'e'
    | |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ |
    | /_/ /_/ | *Si vis pacem, para papunzi

  15. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Biggo did eloquently scribble:
    > Bohus Král wrote:


    >> "Biggo" napísal v správe
    >> > modify your standard direct universe into an alternate one by removing a
    >> > couple diodes and capacitors.

    >>
    >> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    >> ?


    > Naah. You'll just end up with an *inverted* universe where plus is minus
    > and minus is plus, just like in some kind of ill religion or something.


    Antimatter already exists, some think they may be galaxies in this universe
    composed entirely of the stuff.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
    | in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
    | Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  16. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Biggo wrote:

    > Bohus Král wrote:
    >
    >> "Biggo" napísal v správe
    >>> modify your standard direct universe into an alternate one by removing a
    >>> couple diodes and capacitors.

    >> Won't it be easier to settle that electricity would flow from plus to minus
    >> ?

    >
    > Naah. You'll just end up with an *inverted* universe where plus is minus
    > and minus is plus, just like in some kind of ill religion or something.


    Or an episode of Star Trek where they're all evil and have beards.

    --
    Duncan Snowden.


  17. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Duncan Snowden wrote:

    > Or an episode of Star Trek where they're all evil and have beards.


    My favourite (1) is the one where Kirk crawls around with a dwarf on his
    back while Spock plays lyre and sings a romantic song for the pleasure
    of the local emperor o_O

    (1) Read: worst Star Trek episode *evah*

    --
    | ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. Strattinare
    | |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | Se/quando c'e', c'e'
    | |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ |
    | /_/ /_/ | *Si vis pacem, para papunzi

  18. Re: Bloody Google again...


    "Bohus Kral" wrote ...
    >
    > Yes , I am comparying it to water pipe. I think, as the water flows in the
    > pipe, as the electrons flow in copper wire. The difference is that the
    > water is just pushed to pipe from one edge, the electrons are pushed from
    > edge minus and pulled from edge plus.


    In the battery and wire example we have been using, current flow is in a
    closed circuit. That is to say that electrons leaving the battery also
    return to the battery.

    To have an equivalent circuit using water in a pipe, that circuit must be a
    closed circuit also. If we connect one end of the pipe to the outlet of a
    pump and the other end to the inlet of the same pump we have an equivalent
    circuit. The water is being pushed into one end of the pipe, and pulled out
    of the other end.
    --
    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett

    Change is inevitable,
    except from vending machines!




  19. Re: Bloody Google again...


    "Sam Gillett" napísal

    > To have an equivalent circuit using water in a pipe, that circuit must be
    > a
    > closed circuit also. If we connect one end of the pipe to the outlet of a
    > pump and the other end to the inlet of the same pump we have an equivalent
    > circuit. The water is being pushed into one end of the pipe, and pulled
    > out
    > of the other end.


    That's right, but still, let's remain in water pipe :
    There is a 10km long water pipe. In the middle of it there is one molecule
    of H2O (5km from left, 5km from right. We push a pump. Till the information
    comes to this molecule, that something is pushing it from left (5km) and
    something is pulling it from right (5km), there must pass some time. I
    believe, that everything is elastic, nothing is absolutely hard, it comes
    out from structure of atom and the forces within it., I think.

    B


  20. Re: Bloody Google again...

    Bohus Král did eloquently scribble:

    > "Sam Gillett" napísal


    >> To have an equivalent circuit using water in a pipe, that circuit must be
    >> a
    >> closed circuit also. If we connect one end of the pipe to the outlet of a
    >> pump and the other end to the inlet of the same pump we have an equivalent
    >> circuit. The water is being pushed into one end of the pipe, and pulled
    >> out
    >> of the other end.


    > That's right, but still, let's remain in water pipe :
    > There is a 10km long water pipe. In the middle of it there is one molecule
    > of H2O (5km from left, 5km from right. We push a pump. Till the information
    > comes to this molecule, that something is pushing it from left (5km) and
    > something is pulling it from right (5km), there must pass some time. I
    > believe, that everything is elastic, nothing is absolutely hard, it comes
    > out from structure of atom and the forces within it., I think.


    In order to use the pipe as an analogy it MUST be FULL of water.
    It isn't the water itself that carries the information. It's the pressure
    and/or current fluctuations in the pipe. The pump varies its pressure
    (voltage) which causes the current to increase or decrease. This pressure
    wave travels along the pipe far faster than the flow of water itself.

    Information is not carried by the electrons, it's carried by the "pressure".
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
    | in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
    | Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast