Confused with batteries in series.

[bdunham7]

Again, not helpful to the OP's understanding. And while it may be true (dubious) from a pure physics standpoint that voltage can be absolute, the electronics in question here clearly and unambiguously deals only with current electricity, where voltage is definitely a relative measurement. Bringing electroscopes into the picture for someone who clearly needs to be learning the basics of a multimeter is simply not helpful.

I have found that when someone asks a question that appears to be the 'wrong' question, the best course is to at least try to address the actual question before proceeding on to tell the querier that they 'should' be asking a different question.  I wouldn't presume anything about the OPs intentions nor what they should or should not be learning. 

Electricity in the cosmos is largely of the static and absolute variety, not the sideshow we call electronics where we 'tame' it and make it run around in loops and through our devices like a flea circus.

[drussell]

While it is true that once connected together, electrons are now able to flow between the two batteries connected via one battery's - terminal to the other's + terminal with no second connection (and in the strictest physics sense a few do flow momentarily,) I think that the OP still needs to grasp the more fundamental idea that with nothing to push those electrons "out" the - side or attract them, suck them "in the other side", the + side of the far battery by actually having somewhere to go, no current will flow through the (open) circuit.

Once the circuit is closed, the electrons are pushed and pulled through the circuit "loop", causing current to flow.

How much current flows depends on the voltage (ie. pressure) and how well connected everything is.  (The resistance of the circuit.)

While yes, from a strictly technical physics perspective this is a simplification, I don't think it is probably helpful to the OP's basic understanding to get into transmission lines and watching electrons zip through long coaxial cables to show that a yes, few electrons do actually zip along to balance any two electrically connected things out, but I don't think that was what the OP was getting at.  I could be wrong, though, of course, we'll have to let the OP chime in. 

There are better ways of demonstrating that principle, like using a Van de Graaff generator to make static electricity build up a bunch of electrons on one person, making their hair stand up, then joining another person, or using balloons with bits of styrofoam or whatever and showing that half of the charge moves to another balloon by seeing how the styrofoam bits behave when you "connect" the balloons so the electrons can jump over and even out between the two balloons, etc. etc.

Edit: Changed wording in first paragraph to try to be more clear.

[drussell]

Electricity in the cosmos is largely of the static and absolute variety, not the sideshow we call electronics where we 'tame' it and make it run around in loops and through our devices like a flea circus.

Indeed. 

Electronics is all about taming some of those wild, "angry pixies" and forcing them to do work for us. 

[Electro Fan]

Again, not helpful to the OP's understanding. And while it may be true (dubious) from a pure physics standpoint that voltage can be absolute, the electronics in question here clearly and unambiguously deals only with current electricity, where voltage is definitely a relative measurement. Bringing electroscopes into the picture for someone who clearly needs to be learning the basics of a multimeter is simply not helpful.

I have found that when someone asks a question that appears to be the 'wrong' question, the best course is to at least try to address the actual question before proceeding on to tell the querier that they 'should' be asking a different question.  I wouldn't presume anything about the OPs intentions nor what they should or should not be learning. 

Electricity in the cosmos is largely of the static and absolute variety, not the sideshow we call electronics where we 'tame' it and make it run around in loops and through our devices like a flea circus.

Maybe the OP is snoozing, or enjoying what the question unleashed with some  , or getting some really good ‘s out of this, or is trying to take it all in but is finding it  .  Seems at least temporarily MIA.... who knows....?  But in the meantime this thread is informative , entertaining, and I think maybe going to be pretty memorable.  This might deserve to be in a sticky of good quotes:

”Electricity in the cosmos is largely of the static and absolute variety, not the sideshow we call electronics where we 'tame' it and make it run around in loops and through our devices like a flea circus.” 
- emphasis on the italic part 

[tooki]

Again, not helpful to the OP's understanding. And while it may be true (dubious) from a pure physics standpoint that voltage can be absolute, the electronics in question here clearly and unambiguously deals only with current electricity, where voltage is definitely a relative measurement. Bringing electroscopes into the picture for someone who clearly needs to be learning the basics of a multimeter is simply not helpful.

I have found that when someone asks a question that appears to be the 'wrong' question, the best course is to at least try to address the actual question before proceeding on to tell the querier that they 'should' be asking a different question.

I didn't tell the querier what they should be asking. I was admonishing responders to keep the replies at a level appropriate for the querier. Going off on know-it-all tangents that are way beyond the OP's head is nothing more than posturing.

I wouldn't presume anything about the OPs intentions nor what they should or should not be learning. 

I didn't make any such presumptions. My analogy about the multimeter was at you for bringing electrometers into the discussion!

Electricity in the cosmos is largely of the static and absolute variety, not the sideshow we call electronics where we 'tame' it and make it run around in loops and through our devices like a flea circus.

OK, I must grant you that that's a magnificent wording! But with that said, in reality, we constantly use abstractions and simplifications, because it's literally impossible to learn everything at full detail from the beginning. That's why we start by teaching rules, and then later, we say "so remember that rule from before? OK, it was actually a lie, there are exceptions." And we iteratively repeat this, because starting with simplifications is the way to get the big picture, which is needed in order to make sense of the details.

[bdunham7]

I didn't make any such presumptions. My analogy about the multimeter was at you for bringing electrometers into the discussion!

Yes, a bit of thread creep. That was directed at ejeffrey, not the OP.  But on reflection, perhaps the beginner-level explanations should start with basic demonstrations of electrostatics and not defer that to a college-level course on electric fields.  I happen to like the historical method of teaching science, where you learn about things roughly in the order that they were discovered.  I suppose todays crop  of young would die of boredom doing it that way.

[Gyro]

Maybe the OP is snoozing, or enjoying what the question unleashed with some  , or getting some really good ‘s out of this, or is trying to take it all in but is finding it  .

This thread does seem to be a bit out of step with his posting history. 

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?area=showposts;u=124265

[radiolistener]

I didn't tell the querier what they should be asking. I was admonishing responders to keep the replies at a level appropriate for the querier. Going off on know-it-all tangents that are way beyond the OP's head is nothing more than posturing.

The topic starter clearly state that he already know about closed loop circuit and this is not what he asking. He clearly state that he don't need a basic information, because he already know that. He asked to explain why current don't flows at more detailed level.

just look what topic starter wrote:

Im still a bit confused guys, I do understand that you have to have a closed loop circuit for electricity in series thats not what Im asking. Its not a basic question i am trying to ask.

Did you seen that?

So, why you're still trying to give basic answer for topic starter?
He said that he already know that and don't need basic answer. Isn't it?

[ArthurDent]

The first few replies in this topic gave the answer to the question for those without a physics degree and some of the other replies just confuse what is a simple question with a simple answer suited for the beginning section.  Just think about all the examples of ‘cells’ in series we have in real life.

A 2 cell flashlight (diagram below) uses 2 cells in series to deliver twice the voltage of 1 cell to the bulb. It is the switch that, when closed, allows the circuit to be completed through the bulb and the bulb lights as current flows. If the switch is open there is no complete circuit, no current flows, and no light even though there is a physical connection between the 2 batteries just like in the original drawing. 

A 12 volt auto battery is another example where you actually have six 2 volt cells in series in one case and connecting the cells in series does not cause the cells to discharge. Only when this 6 cell battery is connected to the car and various loads are connected (radio, wipers, headlights) does current flow. 

[tooki]

I didn't tell the querier what they should be asking. I was admonishing responders to keep the replies at a level appropriate for the querier. Going off on know-it-all tangents that are way beyond the OP's head is nothing more than posturing.

The topic starter clearly state that he already know about closed loop circuit and this is not what he asking. He clearly state that he don't need a basic information, because he already know that. He asked to explain why current don't flows at more detailed level.

just look what topic starter wrote:

Im still a bit confused guys, I do understand that you have to have a closed loop circuit for electricity in series thats not what Im asking. Its not a basic question i am trying to ask.

Did you seen that?

So, why you're still trying to give basic answer for topic starter?
He said that he already know that and don't need basic answer. Isn't it?

Because the OP's original question clearly shows some severe confusion at a more basic level.