current returning to a different source

[rattus]

Darn it, Rattus.... okay, new questions for you....

1) If Switch 1 is closed, do electrons flow from the conductive body D towards the terminal of the battery at A?

Can't tell because we don't know the initial conditions, and stray caps are omitted from the diagram. If there are no caps, there will be no current at all. Return path you know!

2) If electrons flow off of the conductive body D, does the conductive body now contain more holes then it previously did before the switch closed?

Holes occur when electrons leave the valence band of semiconductor atoms. In metals we would say there are fewer electrons, but we still don't know the polarity of the net charge.

3) If the conductive body D has more holes, does the wire from the conductive body D to point E also contain more holes than it did before switch 1 closed??

The wires are considered part of the conductive body.

4) Does point E have more holes then it did before switch 1 closed?

The wires are considered part of the conductive body.

5) Do holes attract electrons?

Yes, in semiconductors, and a deficit of free electrons attracts more electrons as well.

6) If Point E has excess holes, does this attract electrons to point F?

The short answer is yes, but we need to know the initial conditions and the configuration of the stray capacitcance.

As mentioned, I would really appreciate some simple yes or no answers from anyone kind enough to do so.

[/QUOTE]

Give me a complete diagram with initial conditions. Then maybe I can answer your questions better. You can also eliminate the ammeters to simplify the diagram which has, in effect, only three nodes. I would suggest tying the negative battery terminal to earth and adding a cap from "D" to earth. You can add caps across the switches also.

 

[rattus]

Where have you and Rattus been getting this notion that I have berated anyone? I am perfectly capable of berating people, and that I do not deny, however, I have not done so in this thread nor on this forum as a whole since I signed up a short time ago.

If I was berating someone, they would most certainly know it, and I would most certainly get admonished for it.

I left this discussion previously because Rattus accused me of similar tactics that I was not guilty of, and now out of the blue, you do the same.

Attack my statements; not me. .

Given the caliber of the participants on this forum, I have the utmost respect for this forum, and I have been extremely careful with my responses; so I resent the fact that the two of you have accused me of berating anyone when this has not occurred.

This forum's reputation precedes itself, and you have attributed my postings to this forum's reputation, when I have not yet fallen into this reputation. I am not above this reputation myself, but don't accuse me of it until I have actually been guilty of it.

I guess I wasn't berated when I was told that I was not an MIT professor and that I should speak for myself or not speak at all! I surely felt berated.

Sheesh!

 

[crossman]

Rattus, you are always raining on my parade!:grin:

Okay, your point is well taken. I will come up with a new diagram, but I will have to do it tomorrow. Rest assured that the experiment is going to be done in outer space in a perfect vacuum and 19 million light years from any other body in the universe.

 

[crossman]

Oh... Rattus, I want you to know that my entire point with the experiment is to show that if you do something to the positive side of the circuit, you are also doing something to the negative side of the circuit.

Any change in charge on the positive side will absolutely affect the negative side.

 

[rattus]

dbuckley,

Do the losses occur in the air dielectric or from resistive heating due to the capacitive current? I can visualize considerable line to line currents.

And does Zo of the line have any bearing on anything?

 

[Rick Christopherson]

I guess I wasn't berated when I was told that I was not an MIT professor and that I should speak for myself or not speak at all! I surely felt berated.

Sheesh!

Nope. What you felt was correct. You were berated--although it was tame for my standards. I don't berate people that I respect, so I have not berated anyone on this forum beside you--and that was simply because you asked for it. But then again, by your own admission, you were already privately admonished for your postings that lead to my inexcusable outburst. Nevertheless, I apologize for my past outburst.

You said I argued with an MIT professor, but he was not present here to argue with. Anytime I see someone criticizing the "person" versus their "information", it tells me that they don't have the wherewithal to argue the facts, but disguises it behind personal attacks.

Argue the facts; not personalities. Don't sidetrack this discussion with personal attacks. It is complicated enough as it is.

 

[rattus]

Nope. What you felt was correct. You were berated--although it was tame for my standards. I don't berate people that I respect, so I have not berated anyone on this forum beside you--and that was simply because you asked for it. But then again, by your own admission, you were already privately admonished for your postings that lead to my inexcusable outburst. Nevertheless, I apologize for my past outburst.

You said I argued with an MIT professor, but he was not present here to argue with. Anytime I see someone criticizing the "person" versus their "information", it tells me that they don't have the wherewithal to argue the facts, but disguises it behind personal attacks.

Argue the facts; not personalities. Don't sidetrack this discussion with personal attacks. It is complicated enough as it is.

Wow! How legalistic and petty can one be? Anyone else would recognize a tongue in cheek statement, and treat it as such instead of going on a tirade. My point was that you ignored this well established and well documented fact.

I guess too that I should feel better since your response was "tame"!

 

[Rick Christopherson]

Oh bull....Backpeddle as fast as you can!!!! Sing the song.

:grin: In support of your position...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj9m5l1GfDk

 

[dbuckley]

Do the losses occur in the air dielectric or from resistive heating due to the capacitive current?

The capcitive losses are from charging the line on each halfcycle; the air is a dielectric, separating the wire from the other wires and other things.

I can visualize considerable line to line currents.

My understanding is that if the line has enough capacitance, it does no useful work; you cant get power out of the other end. This would suggest there is considerable line current, in fact the line's full rated current.

And does Zo of the line have any bearing on anything?

I would guess it must. A long line looks like a repeating pi filter, with inductance in series and capacitance to ground, so its essentially a time constant.

I have heard (but cant quote a source, thus is hearsay) that one of the things you make sure you do in AC long line system design is to ensure that the resonant frequency of the line is not equal to a multiple of the supply frequency, 'cos otherwise you're driving into a short circuit, even though a DC ohmmeter says the line is open. This may be utter codswallop, of course; if anyone knows either way I'd appreciate some clarification.

 

[jghrist]

I have heard (but cant quote a source, thus is hearsay) that one of the things you make sure you do in AC long line system design is to ensure that the resonant frequency of the line is not equal to a multiple of the supply frequency, 'cos otherwise you're driving into a short circuit, even though a DC ohmmeter says the line is open. This may be utter codswallop, of course; if anyone knows either way I'd appreciate some clarification.

Now you're getting into really long lines, or high frequencies. This is like adding a matching transformer to the end of a coax cable.

 

[crossman]

Rattus, here is the thought experiment I promised:

Initial Conditions:

The experiment exists in a vacuum and is sufficiently removed from all ouside bodies as to negate any external influences.

The 2 batteries have minimal internal resitance and they are special in the fact that they are voice activated by saying "GO". In other words, the initial condition is that no voltages exist in the experiment until I say the word "GO".

The conductors, switches, and Large Conductive Body have minimal resistance but not zero.

The experiment begins in a neutral state meaning there are no "excess charges" existing at any given point. The electrons are mingling with their associated protons in a low energy state.

The temperature of the components is 60 degrees F.

ALL USEAGE OF THE TERMS "POSITIVE" AND "NEGATIVE" WILL BE IN REFERENCE TO THE MIDPOINT BETWEEN THE BATTERIES.

IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT CAPACITANCE EXISTS AMONGST ALL OF THE COMPONENTS, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM THE WIRE A-B TO THE WIRE G-H. WE WILL IGNORE THOSE CAPACITANCES AND CONSIDER ONLY CAPACITANCES IMPLIED IN MY QUESTIONS.

To commence the experiment, I say "GO" and close switch 1 at the same precise instance.

Questions which need a "YES" or "NO" answer:

1) Do any electrons leave the conductive body and move toward point A?

2) Does the conductive Body become positive?

3) Do any electrons move from point F move toward the Conductive body?

4) Does point F become positive?

5) If point F becomes positive, does it have any type of electrical influence on point G?

6) Will the positive charge at point F attract any electrons to point G?

7) Will any electrons from the negative side of the battery at point H move toward point G?

8) Would we be prudent to say that while current is flowing, that the current in any part of the circuit is essentially the same as in any other part of the circuit?

9) Would we be prudent to say that the positive charge on the Conductive Body is due to BOTH the positive side of the source AND the negative side of the source?

10) Concerning this experiment and initial conditions, is there any mechanism which could pull significantly more electrons off the conductive body than the number of electrons which left the negative side of the battery and traveled into wire G-H?

11) Is there any mechanism which could cause the positive side of the battery "A" to collect more electrons than the negative side of the battery "H" sends out?

 

[Rick Christopherson]

You are trying to solve this as a "circuit analysis" problem, so you will always come up with the same answer. Put away your circuit analysis text book and pick up your physics text book instead.

I am not saying this as demeaning, berating, or insulting. However, as I already stated, you are trying to find an answer that you are comfortable with, and you are excluding those answers that are not within your normal repertoire. Until you do this, you will not find the answer.

 

[Smart $]

You are trying to solve this as a "circuit analysis" problem, so you will always come up with the same answer. Put away your circuit analysis text book and pick up your physics text book instead.

I am not saying this as demeaning, berating, or insulting. However, as I already stated, you are trying to find an answer that you are comfortable with, and you are excluding those answers that are not within your normal repertoire. Until you do this, you will not find the answer.

I agree :wink:

 

[crossman]

If you are not willing to answer the questions, then you have no right to tell me that my viewpoint is wrong.

If I am wrong, then show me some science that proves me wrong. Certainly whatever science you speak of is written somewhere? Surely some phycisist has already discovered a mechanism other than mine?

Offer an alternative view of the circuit. Simply saying that electrons are pulled out of the conductive body but then not accounting for the changes this causes in the rest of the circuit is not science.

Show me.

 

[rattus]

OK then:

OK then:

I agree :wink:

Maybe someone could elaborate on the proper solution. Give us an example please.

 

[crossman]

Rick, I have no interest in "an answer that I am comfortable with". I am interested in what is scientifically valid.

Enlighten me. Give me some science. Otherwise, you may as well tell me, "There is an invisible dragon in my garage which cannot be detected by any physical means, but the the dragon is certainly there."

Jeez guys, I have thought my A$$ off on this! I have done the work and the research.

Have you?

Edit to add: Rick, this diagram is a follow-up to the diagram in which Smart originally posted.

 

[cschmid]

Rick, I have no interest in "an answer that I am comfortable with". I am interested in what is scientifically valid.

Enlighten me. Give me some science. Otherwise, you may as well tell me, "There is an invisible dragon in my garage which cannot be detected by any physical means, but the the dragon is certainly there."

Jeez guys, I have thought my A$$ off on this! I have done the work and the research.

Have you?

Damn you have an invisable dragon..can it fly and are you and it connected telpathicly..and yes your math has been quit informative..:grin:

 

[crossman]

Okay, Rick and Smart.

Don't give me an ad hoc "Your thinking is all messed up" response.

Answer each question with a yes or a no so we can at least find some common ground to start from.

Invest 30 minutes in the exercise. Hell, you may learn something.

Right now, I have to assume that your fear to answer the questions is based in on a lack of understanding of the phenomena at hand.

 

[crossman]

Damn you have an invisable dragon..:grin:

No, Rick has the invisible dragon!

 

[jghrist]

To commence the experiment, I say "GO" and close switch 1 at the same precise instance.

Questions which need a "YES" or "NO" answer:

1) Do any electrons leave the conductive body and move toward point A?

Yes

2) Does the conductive Body become positive?

Yes

3) Do any electrons move from point F move toward the Conductive body??

Yes

4) Does point F become positive?

Yes

5) If point F becomes positive, does it have any type of electrical influence on point G?

Yes

6) Will the positive charge at point F attract any electrons to point G?

Yes

7) Will any electrons from the negative side of the battery at point H move toward point G?

Yes

8) Would we be prudent to say that while current is flowing, that the current in any part of the circuit is essentially the same as in any other part of the circuit?

Yes

9) Would we be prudent to say that the positive charge on the Conductive Body is due to BOTH the positive side of the source AND the negative side of the source?

I'm not sure that it is prudent to speculate on what caused the charge other than the chemical action of the battery.

10) Concerning this experiment and initial conditions, is there any mechanism which could pull significantly more electrons off the conductive body than the number of electrons which left the negative side of the battery and traveled into wire G-H?

I don't think it is useful to talk about how many electrons are pulled off of the conductive body. The same number are pulled off as are pushed on the other side. At the end, the conductive body is electrically neutral.

11) Is there any mechanism which could cause the positive side of the battery "A" to collect more electrons than the negative side of the battery "H" sends out?

No.

I think the key is the "open" point at the end, Switch 2. The voltage after everything is through moving around is all across this switch between points G and F. It is the shape, size, and location of the conductors connected to points G and F that determine how much charge needs to be moved around to get the voltages in balance at the end. The shape, size, and location of the conductors make up the total capacitance of the system between the positively charged part and the negatively charged part. The amount of charge Q that moves from the negative part of the battery to the positive part is V?C. If all of the wires and conductive body and everything else on the positive side is very small and very far apart from everything on the negative side, then the amount of charge that is moved to equalize the voltage is small.

Let's say your whole circuit is contained in the terminals of a D size battery. The top terminal is point F and the bottom is point G. Switch 2 is a (not yet brought near the whole thing) piece of wire that would connect the top of the battery to the bottom. When you voice activated the battery, very few electrons would have to flow to get to full voltage.