General > General Technical Chat
"Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ?
aetherist:
--- Quote from: adx on February 24, 2022, 10:51:11 pm ---
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 24, 2022, 08:04:25 pm ---No, the screw-thread X idea was my idea. I did however think of it after the question of roughness of the surface of a wire was mentioned. And i already knew about roughness affecting the speed of electricity anyhow.
--- End quote ---
Ok I had that detail wrong - apologies for that. Your statement is also short of the truth. I was going to say I thought it was penfold but chose not to check a thing in the interests of sleep. Here is the original text to focus in on this point:
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 10, 2022, 11:59:18 pm ---
--- Quote from: penfold on February 10, 2022, 10:47:49 am ---
--- Quote ---author=aetherist link=topic=299756.msg3997681#msg3997681 date=1644456911][...]The reason i don’t like drift is that it can't explain how electricity propagates at the speed of light, ...
--- End quote ---
...Would a surface current also not imply a rather significant increase in resistance for conductors with a particularly rough or serrated surface?
--- End quote ---
...I agree re serrations. New electricity could be tested by using a say wire with a serrated surface.
I don’t think that serration would have much effect on resistance, it would mainly affect distance, ie time.
A threaded surface might say double the effective length of the wire (or rod or pipe). The extra time for propagation would show. And i am confident that this test would be fatal for old electricity.
Howardlong could do the test(s), using his 20 GHz scope, using say 12" of threaded steel rod, versus 12" of plain rod.
Hmmmm -- a threaded pipe might be a problem, ie threaded outside, smooth inside. Electons could sneak throo the central short-cut.
But a pipe might introduce some other aspects that might give us some new info. Dunno.
--- End quote ---
Serrations weren't (your idea), threads were (and only add practicality but the helix does not affect your principle as you later seemed to confirm), and so was your surprising suggestion that it would affect the propagation time, and even more surprising suggestion of a directly falsifiable test.
To be perfectly honest I thought you were latching onto this idea purely because it hadn't already been tested out in plain view, giving your then-new theory about electons a life they were otherwise destined not to have, driven by pathological confirmation bias. That is why I said that when later discussing the test, and was reluctant to suggest a way forward beyond some possible ground rules. I didn't say "just test it" or whatever you recently claimed I said, my expectation of the null result I've alluded to a few times leads me to suspect with near certainty that you would find a need to change those rules or discredit the test. Your roo-tons arose from that discussion, and although I agree you had no desire to invoke them, a thread-hopping scenario was ripe for the plucking if you ever got your theory too hopelessly trapped. If you weren't at least partly aware of what you are doing then I would simply look upon it as a full-blown delusion and I guess steer clear entirely - but it's not, is it? I know you know that.
My simple point is, science can't work that way in general, it might in your head, but people in general are as unable to swallow it as you are unable to swallow a confounding result. It's a sliding scale of course, with some people so rigidly accepting of a set of scientific principles that they abandon all creativity. Very few to none of them here though, they all seem to be more interested in the madness that resides outside of all our heads, rather than within. Ie, the theories.
--- End quote ---
Ah yes u are correct Penfold thort of serrations -- ok we were going to share the Nobel anyhow, if he did the X.
If a screw-thread (or serrations)(eg bar thread like ribs done in a lathe) duz not slow the electricity in exactly the proportion of the extra distance up n over the threads, then surface hugging electons might be a dead duck.
Bar threads sounds good. Test1 is with no thread. Test2 is with L/4 threaded. Test3 is with L/2. Test4 is with 3L/4. Test5 is with L/1.
The depth of bar thread would be W/2, which would double the distance for the electons.
Test6 7 8 9 is same kind of rod but painted with enamel, L/4 at a time up to L/1.
But as i have said i am willing to put cash on it (with any takers, no limit)(hmmm -- i would luv to have a new scope).
aetherist:
--- Quote from: HuronKing on February 24, 2022, 11:03:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 24, 2022, 10:14:36 pm ---Pierre Marie Robitaille -- for explaining that the CMBR is false.
--- End quote ---
Ooo he's a fun one. The CMBR isn't false - just Pierre's laughable inability to even understand what it is. He's kinda like you in that regard: blatantly ignorant of even the basic tenets of the physics at play.
This video explains why:
--- End quote ---
U stick with doktor Dave. I will stick with Dr Pierre-Marie Robitaille.
HuronKing:
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 24, 2022, 11:17:55 pm ---
U stick with doktor Dave. I will stick with Dr Pierre-Marie Robitaille.
--- End quote ---
Oh I know you would. Professor Dave even predicted all the reasons why you would (he's got a list of all the boxes at 46:03 in his video that you happily check off for yourself).
aetherist:
--- Quote from: HuronKing on February 24, 2022, 11:53:58 pm ---
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 24, 2022, 11:17:55 pm ---
U stick with doktor Dave. I will stick with Dr Pierre-Marie Robitaille.
--- End quote ---
Oh I know you would. Professor Dave even predicted all the reasons why you would (he's got a list of all the boxes at 46:03 in his video that you happily check off for yourself).
--- End quote ---
Dave aint a professor. And he aint a Dr. And u obviously have not looked at Dr R's youtube(s).
HuronKing:
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 25, 2022, 12:09:27 am ---
Dave aint a professor. And he aint a Dr. And u obviously have not looked at Dr R's youtube(s).
--- End quote ---
I have and I split a gut laughing at his claims that the CMBR originates with the Earth's oceans. There is a reason that Pierre sticks to Youtube to preach because his claims wouldn't survive anywhere else. I don't really need Professor Dave (other than the entertaining video) because I already know what the CMBR theory is about (it originates from the Recombination Era).
Pierre thinks the theory originates from mere moments after the BB. Which, as I said a few posts ago, means he has absolutely no concept of what the CMBR even is. He's so inept at understanding the basic science that he doesn't even know where to begin in attacking it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version