General > General Technical Chat
Electroboom: How Right IS Veritasium?! Don't Electrons Push Each Other??
<< < (40/148) > >>
AnalogueLove1867:
Mr hamster_nz
The poynting Vector isn't a magical field that exists in reality.
It is nothing more than a derivative imaginary third field for visualizing the positions of  sources and loads  in electrical  and other systems.
It doesn't say anything about the nature of electricity itself. It also doesn't tell you anything about how/why/where or when electrical energy occurs.
Electricity actually flows from a source to a drain or a place of different potential. The poynting vector doesn't actually show the direction of energy flow or the amount of energy.
It points from an area of lower field power density to an area of higher field power density. The key word is density. NOT total energy.
So a direct derivative of the positions of electrostatic and magnetic field lines. It is a tool for analysis. Nothing more, nothing less.

A poynting vector drawn in a circuit a nanosecond after it has been turned on will show the distance electricity has travelled in a nanosecond and ignore the rest of the loop because electrons haven't started moving yet in the rest of the wire loop.
The poynting vector also doesn't take into account radio waves emitted by the circuit in all directions.

No movement of charged particles = no magnetic or electric fields = no poynting vector.
hamster_nz:

--- Quote from: AnalogueLove1867 on July 03, 2022, 03:29:22 am ---Mr hamster_nz
The poynting Vector isn't a magical field that exists in reality.

--- End quote ---
Agreed! It is the cross product of E (the electric field vector) and H (the magnetizing field).

E really does exist. H is sort-of real (as it depends on the nature of material the B field is in, so is in some way derived), but it is close enough to real that I would call it such.


--- Quote ---It is nothing more than a derivative imaginary third field for visualizing the positions of  sources and loads  in electrical  and other systems.
It doesn't say anything about the nature of electricity itself. It also doesn't tell you anything about how/why/where or when electrical energy occurs.

--- End quote ---
But it does represent "the directional energy flux (the energy transfer per unit area per unit time)" to quote Wikipedia. So things like surface integrals can have a real physical interoperation.


--- Quote ---Electricity actually flows from a source to a drain or a place of different potential. The poynting vector doesn't actually show the direction of energy flow or the amount of energy.
It points from an area of lower field power density to an area of higher field power density. The key word is density. NOT total energy.
So a direct derivative of the positions of electrostatic and magnetic field lines. It is a tool for analysis. Nothing more, nothing less.

--- End quote ---

I could just as easily say that the electrostatic and magnetic field lines do not exist, just as isobars on the weather map don't exist either.


--- Quote ---A poynting vector drawn in a circuit a nanosecond after it has been turned on will show the distance electricity has travelled in a nanosecond and ignore the rest of the loop because electrons haven't started moving yet in the rest of the wire loop.
The poynting vector also doesn't take into account radio waves emitted by the circuit in all directions.

No movement of charged particles = no magnetic or electric fields = no poynting vector.

--- End quote ---
Electric fields still exist when there is no movement of charged particles (electrostatic). But as you say, without magnetic fields the Poynting vector is zero.

My rejecting of power flowing in wires has very tittle to do with the Poynting Vector. Here is some of my various thoughts:

1A flowing in a wire looks the same regardless if 1kW or 100mW of power is being transferred into the load. The only way to tell is to cut the wire, and measure the potential between the two end.

If there was a significant electric field gradient within a wire, then any mobile charges in the wire would be accelerated. That would be doing work in the wire. The wire would tip over to having significant resistance, have a significant potential difference along it, and generate heat.

When current is flowing the charges are drifting along very slowly, and when no current is flowing the charges aren't moving at all - even if the wire is considered to be at a high potential!  So whatever the conditions are that enabling an electron to do work are not present in a wire, (which I guess is what makes it a good wire).

If you have a difference in potential between two plates and add a test charge between them it will experience a force. Whatever is providing the energy is present outside of the wires - the force has to be transferred some how. This is unlike the water pressure is voltage in the "electricity is water" analogy, where you have to be in contact with the water make use of the energy. You can measure the pressure difference between two hoses, but if you put a glass of water between two hoses won't feel a force towards the hose with the lowest pressure.

I think the underlying truth is "the conductors provide the charges, the fields supply the energy", and there are most likely deeper truths under that. But for day-to-day electronics where stupidly high potentials and energies are not involved it makes no difference - the Lumped Element model works fine, until your PCB designer forgets to put two inductors at right angles, or you get unexpected parasitic capacitance between traces, or some other reason that reality ruins your day.
iMo:

--- Quote from: AnalogueLove1867 on July 03, 2022, 01:41:43 am ---..
So. The movement of mass is the fundamental source of all electrical phenomenon and everything else is secondary effects of said movement.
..

--- End quote ---

Prove the theory true and the Nobel Prize is yours..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unified_field_theories
AnalogueLove1867:
But it does represent "the directional energy flux (the energy transfer per unit area per unit time)" to quote Wikipedia. So things like surface integrals can have a real physical interoperation.

And your quote proves that you don't even understand what that means.
It doesn't in any way show that electrical energy flows in one direction in a straight line instead of a loop. Or that Electricity flows outside of wires, or that waves and fields outside the wire are the primary source of energy rather than a secondary emission.

I could just as easily say that the electrostatic and magnetic field lines do not exist, just as isobars on the weather map don't exist either.

You couldn't say that about electrostatic and magnetic fields because they actually exist. There is no Poynting field. It's direction of pointing doesn't demonstrate that electricity flows outside of a wire in a straight line.
Differences in atmospheric pressure certainly exist and areas of equal pressure are directly represented by isobars.
If the local vector direction of the wind was combined with an isobar to create a third imaginary "aether" that moved in a different direction based on arbitrary rules then we would end up
with another imaginary concept that also doesn't exist.

Electric fields still exist when there is no movement of charged particles (electrostatic). But as you say, without magnetic fields the Poynting vector is zero.

But an electric field can't exist without an initial movement of charged particles in order to establish a potential difference. A surplus of electrons or a deficiency of electrons in electrical circuits.

My rejecting of power flowing in wires has very tittle to do with the Poynting Vector. Here is some of my various thoughts:

And that is why you decided to use the poynting vector to somehow prove that electricity flows outside of wires and travels in one direction in a monoline from source to load insinuating that you don't need a circuit loop lol.

1A flowing in a wire looks the same regardless if 1kW or 100mW of power is being transferred into the load. The only way to tell is to cut the wire, and measure the potential between the two end.

No it doesn't look exactly the same. One amp at a lower or higher voltage in the same circuit is going to inevitably show changes in potential difference at the load. You Don't need to cut the wire. You can measure the potential difference between two points in a continuous loop.
A raised negative potential indicates that there is a closer packing of flowing electrons for a given volume due to resistance limiting current flow. This creates an equal and opposite raised positive potential elsewhere due to a lower packing of flowing
 electrons in a given volume.

If there was a significant electric field gradient within a wire, then any mobile charges in the wire would be accelerated. That would be doing work in the wire. The wire would tip over to having significant resistance, have a significant potential difference along it, and generate heat.

Electrons are electrostatically pushing each other in one direction through a conductor. They don't accelerate in DC ( but they do accelerate initially when the circuit is turned on ).
They are limited in movement by the electron in front, the electron behind and the positive charges of the atom nuclei. No acceleration in a wire if there is no alternating electromotive force.

 In AC, electrons are constantly accelerating. If they didn't accelerate,  antennas would never emit electromagnetic waves.
And Yes if the potential difference is great enough in DC, electrons can overcome the limiting forces of ordinary electron travel in a conductor/semiconductor or insulator and actually accelerate continuously in one direction only.
Other types of conducting mediums do not require special conditions for electrons to accelerate in DC.
In a cathode ray tube electrons are always accelerated. In a low pressure discharge lamp the electrons are always accelerated. In an electrical discharge (such as lightning), the electrons are always being accelerated.
Yes , all wires have resistance and a potential difference along them no matter how slight. The only exception being superconductors but even superconductors have a limit on the amount of current they can carry whilst remaining in a superconducting mode.

When current is flowing the charges are drifting along very slowly, and when no current is flowing the charges aren't moving at all - even if the wire is considered to be at a high potential!  So whatever the conditions are that enabling an electron to do work are not present in a wire, (which I guess is what makes it a good wire).

If you switch on a circuit the first electron out the negative terminal pushes against the next electron via their negative electric fields. Because electrons have mass and thus momentum, it takes time for this electron to absorb the energy of the first electron and
then move forwards to push the next electron that will also take time to change direction due to momentum and attraction to the positive nuclei. Within a microscopic fraction of a second ( but well below the speed of light ) This cascading push of electrons will reach the opposite terminal and then all the electrons will be moving at a constant speed. The initial pulse of acceleration is gone because all the electrons are now moving in the same direction relative to the wire.

Yes, a high potential with a depletion or over abundance of electrons doesn't need any moving charge to MAINTAIN itself if it is free of leakage. (An electrical circuit is a continuous leakage of electrons from the cathode to the anode)
BUT, the only way to initially CREATE a high potential is by expending energy to forcefully move charged particles. In this case removing electrons from one side of a capacitor and placing them on the other side.

If you have a difference in potential between two plates and add a test charge between them it will experience a force. Whatever is providing the energy is present outside of the wires - the force has to be transferred some how.
This is unlike the water pressure is voltage in the "electricity is water" analogy, where you have to be in contact with the water make use of the energy. You can measure the pressure difference between two hoses, but if you put a glass of water between two hoses won't feel a force towards the hose with the lowest pressure.

No, you absolute @@@,  The extra elections inside one plate of the capacitor are literally pulling on the electron depleted protons in the other plate... And you had to move electrons from one plate to the other in order to create a potential difference in the first place.  The test charge also had to be created by expending energy to forcefully move electrons.

I think the underlying truth is "the conductors provide the charges, the fields supply the energy", and there are most likely deeper truths under that.
But for day-to-day electronics where stupidly high potentials and energies are not involved it makes no difference - the Lumped Element model works fine,
until your PCB designer forgets to put two inductors at right angles, or you get unexpected parasitic capacitance between traces, or some other reason that reality ruins your day.

Literally nothing you have ever said has demonstrated in any way that electricity actually flows outside a wire as waves or  that fields outside a wire are the primary source of energy.
They aren't. The are a secondary effect of moving charged particles with mass inside a conductor.
In my opinion. The underlying truth is actually that low IQ adults and children love watching pop science crap on youtube produced by smoothbrains like Veritasium who's only talent is in
Getting millions of views and maximizing his own paycheck. He is a joke and you are also a joke if you think he cares or even thinks deeply about any of the concepts he talks about.
AnalogueLove1867:

--- Quote from: imo on July 03, 2022, 07:08:51 am ---
--- Quote from: AnalogueLove1867 on July 03, 2022, 01:41:43 am ---..
So. The movement of mass is the fundamental source of all electrical phenomenon and everything else is secondary effects of said movement.
..

--- End quote ---

Prove the theory true and the Nobel Prize is yours..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unified_field_theories

--- End quote ---




What I am saying isn't a theory ( it is well established fact ).
And it isn't a unifying field theory of everything.
Likewise, nobody has ever produced a unifying field theory and I doubt that it is even possible.
It could be just as futile as trying to create a perpetual energy machine.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod