Electricity (Part 2.)

165851x 07. 03. 2017 1 Reader

Positive and negative particles of matter

In 1920, a force was defined that holds the atoms composed of positive and neutral particles together. It could not be a normal electrical charge. It must be a different form of charge. So, so-called " Color strength. It was only 50 years later that a strong interaction was demonstrated. 1934 discovered Enrico Fermi the so-called weak interaction that is responsible for radioactive decay. When radioactive elements break down, high energy electrons or their positive antiparticles - positrons - are created. So we have four interacting forces: a strong one that holds particles in atoms together, normal, weak, weak-radioactive decay, and gravitational force. It is assumed that the first three forces arose during the Big Bang explosion. Assumed! Then they emerged as the force of one, when apart from the collapse of the expanding universe they separated themselves. This is THEORY. To confirm this theory, scientists are trying to prove the correctness of gigantic accelerators, such as the LHC in Geneva. Length 27 km, costs 3 billion EUR. The conditions that prevailed during the VT are, in fact, the scientists are approaching slowly. In order to simulate the VT and to create the forces of interaction, we would need a 1000 light-years accelerator. It's not a crap, it's math. Let us return to electrons and electricity.

Electric current

Electric current can not be seen, yet from the end of 19. century developed the electricity industry using. Still, no one could imagine this PROUD. To be with "By" (!) has the definition that the electric current consists of small particles that are positively charged which simply move from the PLUS pole to the MINUS pole of the electrical source, eg the battery. It was only many years later that 1897 found that the discovered electron is charged negatively and ranges from MINUS to PLUS! It has been proven to be the construction of television screens, the original giants. Is not that amazing? On virtually completely wrong definition were and are built power plants and developed smart phones!

How can it be that such tiny particles, which can not be seen and which have a massive weight, can illuminate a million city, heat houses and power huge engines? The answer is in their quantity. In one cubic centimeter of copper wire, for example, there are unimaginable 6 × 10²³ atoms. 6 x 10 and 23 to zero. That's more than the number of stars in the visible universe! For an idea: Take a pile of cube sugar. What area would that take? You certainly will not! One square meter is 100 x 100 cm. This is 10.000 cubes. For one square kilometer - 1000 x 1000m, you need 10 billion balls, ie 10¹⁰. That's a good number. But: Europe from Portugal to Ural and from Nordkap to Sicily has an area of ​​10 million square km. But we have "only" 10¹7 sugars. The total surface area of ​​our planet is 500 million square kilometers. We get the number of cubes 5 x 10¹⁸. To cover the entire surface of the Sun, which has 12.000x larger than the Earth, we get close. The number of sugar cubes reaches 6 x 10². That means we can pave the surface of the sun 10x by sugar! And please, in one cubic centimeter of copper wire. So it's an incredible amount of small particles that work here.

Electricity is measured in electrical engineering. current in amperes. Taking a simple pocket flashlight, that is, a flashlight, in its bulb from the minus pole to the pole plus, approximately 1015 electrons per second flow. Converted to sugar - we would cover half the Czech Republic. In a second!

Electricity

More parts from the series

16 comments on "Electricity (Part 2.)"

  • fero says:

    I have no doubt that Einstein E = mc2 has also proven.

    I only claim that energy has a moving mass even at lower speeds than the speed of light. In this case, E = mv2 would be the equivalent of F = ma2, where a is the speed for a certain time. It follows that energy should be a force, but the mass should also be mass m = E / v2 or m = F / a2.

    The higher the speed of the body, the greater its force, and the energy. In fact, matter and energy can not only flood one another but also work together. It's like in the water. Para, liquid, ice. Mass and energy vary according to conditions.

    • Standa Standa says:

      Certainly, it has energy even at lower speeds. It is just that the weight at low speeds is so small against the resting mass of ordinary bodies that it is usually neglected. For low speeds, Newtonian physics becomes practically Newtonian physics. But unlike steam / liquid states, the transition between them is very gradual.

      • fero says:

        So the room weight of energy is approaching zero to zero?

        Then the vacuum really could be full of energy, and there might still be gravitational forces in it.

        Water is a compound of two chemical elements that carry the specific properties and, in addition, have had to come to a compromise that has created more complex links between them. Water is information much more complex than the particles of the quantum world, so changing the water on the steam is also a bigger theater. It is as if someone wanted to dull an educated man with a jar or change it. Because he is educated, he should have more opportunities for rational defense. But you just need to find a weak spot and it will be easier. For water, for example, the pressure is weak. At lower pressure, it will soon be caught, even if the theater is actually the same.

        • Standa Standa says:

          Weight and energy are bound by E = mc2. There is a direct proportion. If you add an energy of a given size to a body, and the body keeps it, its weight will increase by the above value.

  • fero says:

    The electrons are astonished at their speed. Atom keeps a strong interaction. But it still does not explain the electron velocity. Does anyone know what the electron is getting at speed?

    • Standa Standa says:

      Strong interaction holds together the nucleus of the atom. The electron holds an electromagnetic interaction in the atom.

      At Electron Speed: You should probably mention where and how you measured it. We may find out why it is what it is.

      • fero says:

        That's why I asked. The speed or position of the electron can not be determined accurately.

        Depending on the velocity, it is assumed that the electric current is sulfur at 75% light, whereas the electron beam with the positron can produce a photon that fades fast. However, according to E = mc2, the photon should be only energy and not matter. However, the photon can be disintegrated with electron and positron. So how is it with this photon? Is it tangible or intangible?

        • Standa Standa says:

          What you are writing is not true. Can not determine speed or position. More precisely, the accuracy with which we determine one, the exact precise determination of the second quantity in a given ratio. That's why I asked where and how you measured the speed.

          Electricity spreads rapidly, but the electrons that carry it move relatively slowly.

          Annihilation of electron-positron is another problem. I remind you that the photons are always two, not just one. A photons do not have a resting mass. Relative weight (more precisely, momentum). Weight and resting weight are not the same in relativistic physics.

          • fero says:

            You're right. Yeah, I got one or the other. Both at the same time not. But I still did not know what makes the electron velocity?

            The electrics can be carriers of electric current and light. So why could not wearing gravity?

            • Standa Standa says:

              The electron gives you the same speed as any other body: the effect of some power for some time or another energy supply.

              The electron is the light wearer in the same way as light bearers of coal. Both can release the photons - light - in a suitable reaction with other objects.

              • fero says:

                The electron gives the energy speed. The electrode is a dual particle. Either he or she is in the room and has a room weight and can detect its location or become a wave particle, thereby gaining momentum, but at the same time disappears from the sight of the visible world. At that time, it has a mass of motion. Just like a photon. Since the electron has a mass mass as a wave particle, it is also the carrier of gravity as well as the photon. The ball is a so-called relativistic view, but it is.

                And now the most interesting thing is going to happen. The electron is very slow compared to the photon. The electric current wavelength reaches 75% of the speed of light. But there is E = mc2, which says that energy has a mass but at the speed of light. This condition is met by a photon, not an electron. The electrode as the wave particle does not reach the speed of light and thus can become part of the waves.

                How is it all then?

                • Standa Standa says:

                  The position of the electron and its momentum can be inaccurately determined both in (relative) peace and motion. There is practically no difference.

                  In the second paragraph, you are knitting together two different things: the speed of electron movement and the rate of electrical propagation. These are very different speeds. Current usually spreads rapidly, electrons usually slowly (but of course it is more complex and it can be the opposite).

                  For example, electrons fly electrons between the electrodes at about 0,1 c speed. Only the average speed in meters per second is in the conductor. Even though the current flows at almost the speed of light.

                  • fero says:

                    The electric current is built on a huge amount of electrons. So the electrons themselves do not have to move fast. It is enough that the ripple passes through it. The electrode just needs to pass a piece to fill the gap.

                    But there is still electromagnetic waves and the electron has a charge on it. This can also be propagated between particles without charge. The electromagnetic wave reaches the speed of light. Its intensity decreases with the first power of distance from the source. Electromagnetic waves are faster than electrical currents.

                    So those waves that can use the electron are more. However, as you write, its speed does not reach the speed of either of these ripples. So what moves him?

                    If it is supposed to be energy, then the strained force alias the movement weight alias the ripple, it must be more speedy and, moreover, at more speeds it can have the weight.

                    How can E = mc2 pay?

                    Should E = mv2 not only pay?

                    • Standa Standa says:

                      The intensity of electromagnetic waves decreases depending on how you look at them:

                      -Only (if you are watching a single photon)

                      - with the second power of the distance (you watch the wave as a whole)

                      E = mc2 applies to resting mass. The total (relativistic) weight may be larger. E = mc2 results from the general theory of relativity, as Einstein demonstrated in one of his articles from 1905.

        • Nezmar23 says:

          Speed ​​el. current is the same as the velocity of any el.mag. Photon occurs when the electron passes from a lower to a higher valence layer. When an electron and a positron meet, these elements are annihilated.

  • Standa Standa says:

    Just Things:
    - The theories of the unification of weak and electromagnetic interactions have been theoretically described and verified practically decades ago. The Nobel Prize was awarded for the theory in 1979 - when the first experimental evidence of its truthfulness existed.
    - The fact that the electron is charged negatively is known from 1897. Screens are actually a variation on the door that the electron was discovered at that time. Inventions 20. century (eg mobile phone) have come about with the knowledge of the correct nature of the current flow.

Leave a Reply