Jump to content

Robust debate - Technical discussions.


DHutch

Featured Posts

Did you know that the average drift velocity of electrons is very slow? In the life of a torch battery it is likely that an electron wil not have made one complete turn of the circuit.

 

Anyone like me to do the calculation?

 

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that the holes were created by the electrons moving on, so surely the speed of "hole flow" will be the same as electron flow?

Nope. Think of a very (very!) long hose pipe full of marbles. If you push a marble in one end then another will pop out of the other end immediately, instant 'hole'. However, because of the length of the hose it will take a long time before the marble you pushed in gets to the other end itself.

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Think of a very (very!) long hose pipe full of marbles. If you push a marble in one end then another will pop out of the other end immediately, instant 'hole'. However, because of the length of the hose it will take a long time before the marble you pushed in gets to the other end itself.

Tony

'ere, I just tried that and you're quite right.

 

Now, 'ow the 'ell do I get them marbles out of my water tank, eh?

 

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "hole" flowrate is 0. The holes don't move - they are either occupied or vacant. However, by inventing an arbitrary "free hole" parameter you can define it in a way which makes the holes appear to go very fast!

 

 

Its like me arranging beforehand, to set off from London in a red VW Passat. Then someone else, 1 minute later, arrives in Edinburgh in a similar red VW Passat. A Passat has arrived, apparently very quickly, but its not the Passat I am in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Per SECOND, old boy. PER SECOND.

 

Come on!

Oh yeah...

Its like me arranging beforehand, to set off from London in a red VW Passat. Then someone else, 1 minute later, arrives in Edinburgh in a similar red VW Passat. A Passat has arrived, apparently very quickly, but its not the Passat I am in.

Didn't Schrödinger say that it might be?

 

Or was that Occam?

 

This beer's good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Think of a very (very!) long hose pipe full of marbles. If you push a marble in one end then another will pop out of the other end immediately, instant 'hole'. However, because of the length of the hose it will take a long time before the marble you pushed in gets to the other end itself.

 

Tony

Thanks Tony,

 

It's all clear to me now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a number of analogies that are useful in explaining electrical current and voltage. I have tried the water analogy and that can work well but only if the pupils understand water flow and pressure differences. Might seem obvious to us but the children that I taught often had a deal of difficulty. For a series circuit I thought up a bicycle chain analogy. Tension in the chain is voltage. Speed of the chain around the loop is current and is the same all around. The chine wheels and pedals are the power source etc. etc.

 

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

The "hole" flowrate is 0. The holes don't move - they are either occupied or vacant. However, by inventing an arbitrary "free hole" parameter you can define it in a way which makes the holes appear to go very fast!

 

 

Its like me arranging beforehand, to set off from London in a red VW Passat. Then someone else, 1 minute later, arrives in Edinburgh in a similar red VW Passat. A Passat has arrived, apparently very quickly, but its not the Passat I am in.

You just messed up the theory of chances having transporters like in Star Trek

 

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zombies get everywhere.

Phil

In their own time and space, Flappy!!

 

M x

 

ETA - and STILL can't find Wot Ever at Springwood Haven - he's even disappeared from the outside moorings at Trinity now - must be a very big black hole on the Cut in these parts ..... Beam me back Ooop North, please!

Edited by metanoia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In their own time and space, Flappy!!

 

M x

 

ETA - and STILL can't find Wot Ever at Springwood Haven - he's even disappeared from the outside moorings at Trinity now - must be a very big black hole on the Cut in these parts ..... Beam me back Ooop North, please!

Working on it as we speak.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I guess I am occasionally guilty of going off in a new direction. I can see the point Dan is driving at. Some poor so-and-so has a blown alternator diode and ends up with a discussion on the Theory Of Relativity. Having said that, all education is good. No harm in exercising the cerebral muscles. As I recall there did used to be some pretty ferocious electrical debates on the site. Almost along the lines of Blood Sports. That has now calmed a lot and few signs of heated exchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Electronics is a really "bitchy" field. I was banned from two vintage radio sites simply because somehow I didn't follow the social pecking order rules. The impression I got was the members were somehow carrying a chip on their shoulder over the collapse of the TV repair industry. There was one individual who seemed to spend his time waiting for me to make some mistake. I did do once with a simple maths calculation on Ohms Law. Then he pounced and created a drama. Also used the sarcastic put-down in the style of, "Ohms Law is a good thing for you to learn you know!" To be honest, in books I've encountered simple maths mistakes by very high-ranked experts but they were just of the absent minded variety. Most common is when the source voltage is said to be 260 AC but the figures are then based on 230. I am hardly going to be stupid enough as to declare the individual doesn't know Ohms Law. What really amazed me once was a review on Amazon that referred to Rick Mcwhorter's electronics repair book. There was an undergraduate student who slammed the book and called the author "a tinkerer who doesn't understand electrical theory". This was due to some silly misprints such as "sign wave" and undetected maths blunders. Yet, in actual fact, Mcwhorter is incredibly good in his field. I discovered he was trained in the Air Force and worked on jet engines. He was slammed by critics for using the term "positive bias" when strictly he should have said "less negative" but to me it was clear what he meant. Surely it's not wrong to call 2 volts negative "positive" compared to 4 volts negative? Yet he was savaged by critics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Electronics is a really "bitchy" field. I was banned from two vintage radio sites simply because somehow I didn't follow the social pecking order rules. The impression I got was the members were somehow carrying a chip on their shoulder over the collapse of the TV repair industry. There was one individual who seemed to spend his time waiting for me to make some mistake. I did do once with a simple maths calculation on Ohms Law. Then he pounced and created a drama. Also used the sarcastic put-down in the style of, "Ohms Law is a good thing for you to learn you know!" To be honest, in books I've encountered simple maths mistakes by very high-ranked experts but they were just of the absent minded variety. Most common is when the source voltage is said to be 260 AC but the figures are then based on 230. I am hardly going to be stupid enough as to declare the individual doesn't know Ohms Law. What really amazed me once was a review on Amazon that referred to Rick Mcwhorter's electronics repair book. There was an undergraduate student who slammed the book and called the author "a tinkerer who doesn't understand electrical theory". This was due to some silly misprints such as "sign wave" and undetected maths blunders. Yet, in actual fact, Mcwhorter is incredibly good in his field. I discovered he was trained in the Air Force and worked on jet engines. He was slammed by critics for using the term "positive bias" when strictly he should have said "less negative" but to me it was clear what he meant. Surely it's not wrong to call 2 volts negative "positive" compared to 4 volts negative? Yet he was savaged by critics.

Sounds like some members on here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.