If the electrical energy is outside the wires, how is insulation protecting us? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 03:13:06 am
content: This question stems from the Veritasium video (below) and Dave's analysis of that video (also below). Both Derek (8:56 in his video) and Dave (5:17 in his video) say that the fields carry the energy. I am not disputing this, but what I don't understand is why am I not getting shocked when I grab an insulated piece of Romex if all the energy is "outside" the wire?

author: andy3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 03:51:19 am
content: You get a shock if you conduct electricity through your body, so to speak. The energy referred to in this case is magnetic energy and that does not shock you. This is the simplest explanation.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 04:04:05 am
content: Quote from: andy3055 on April 01, 2022, 03:51:19 amAre you saying that there is some "energy" other than the energy that Derek and Dave are referring to? It seems to me that the videos are saying there is only one kind of "electrical energy", and that energy exists in the fields outside the wire, but your response makes it seem like that isn't true. What is the other energy that is shocks us? Does that energy "flow"?

author: andy3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:34:21 pm
content: I do not comment on other people's videos. The magnetic energy is the result of the electrical energy.A simple example would be touching a hot plate. Would you get shocked? You will get burnt, if it is hot enough. The heat is a result of the electrical energy.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 04:10:17 pm
content: I agree with andy3055. The electrical shock suffered by the victim is the result of electrical current flowing through the body. A classic demonstration of electrostatics is to put an attractive female with long light-blonde hair on a carefully insulated platform and charge her with a Van de Graaff generator: her hair will fly out from her head, but (unless something goes horribly wrong) she does not feel a shock. (I saw this in high school almost 60 years ago, but it's probably not done in public schools anymore.) There is a large body of safety literature about what affects this current for different conditions (e.g., skin moisture and electrical frequency).

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 04:47:47 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 01, 2022, 04:10:17 pmYou mean like the picture on the left?

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 05:00:26 pm
content: Exactly. Although my blonde classmate was cuter, with finer hair.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 05:20:51 pm
content: Quote from: andy3055 on April 01, 2022, 02:34:21 pmI don't think this is a good example. A hot plate isn't a bare conductor. The part exposed to us is an insulating metal oxide tube which is also grounded. Touching it would be the equivalent of touching a really hot wire (assuming the wire's insulation wasn't at the point of melting off). A toaster oven on the other hand has exposed heating elements. If you touch them youwillget electrocuted in addition to getting burnt.

author: nigelwright7557
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 05:26:08 pm
content: Quote from: andy3055 on April 01, 2022, 03:51:19 amThe energy is in the magnetic and electric fields which are at 90 degree's to each other.Neither of which will shock you.Shock is caused by electrons moving into your body.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:12:39 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 01, 2022, 03:13:06 amDispute it! If there was a pile of energy outside the wire then it could be harvested:https://hackaday.com/2017/04/10/wirelessly-charge-your-phone-from-high-voltage-power-lines/Which works in a changing (alternating current) field. It would be possible to come up with some contrived examples where a conductor with insulation that would be safe to touch at DC, would give you a shock when carrying some high frequency RF energy.The sleight of hand that the electrical riddle exposes, is the transition from steady state in open circuit to another steady state DC operation with the lamp on. Between these states there are changing fields and energy outside the wires, that is measurable and well accepted. But after some time (seconds for that exaggerated thought experiment) its back to DC and there is no energy outside the wire which you can interact with or get shocked by.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:26:19 pm
content: So then, what is energy?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:31:29 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 01, 2022, 03:13:06 amThe answer is that Derek & Dave & Nick & Mehdi & Brian & Bob & Co are all wrong. The energy is not (wholly) in the fields.If u have to touch the wire (or nearly) then the energy is due to something in or on the wire.Old (electron) electricity says that the energy (force) is carried & transmitted by slowly drifting electrons inside the wire.My new (electon) electricity says that the energy is carried & transmitted at the speed of light via electons (photons hugging the wire) on the surface of the wire.Both electricitys satisfy the fact that insulation prevents electrocution.The problem in a way involves the terminology. The electric energy is produced somewhere somehow. It is located somewhere in someform. It is carried by something in someway.And all the time or sometime electric energy is also radiated as em radiation, & is available if u have the means to take advantage of it.The em radiation is to some extent a minor form of electric energy in its own right, but em radiation is mainly a form of transmission of electric energy. If u tap into this em radiation then u can extract electric energy from the wire, where the major part of the electric energy lives.The human body can't readily tap into the electric energy on the wire via the em radiation. We have to touch the wire. Even then we can't readily extract much electric energy (ie get a big shock). To get a big shock we have to also touch the ground, or another wire.Derek & Dave & Nick & Mehdi & Brian & Bob & Co are all wrong. Electric energy is in or on (i say on) the wire.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:32:21 pm
content: Mains transmission lines carry the superposition of a multitude of wavefronts. Each increment of wave energy is imperceptible, and most of them cancel out, hence why little power flows until a load is connected, and even then only what the load needs, not the full, whatever, 120V / Zo (which for romex is ballpark 100 ohms) that a single full-step wavefront would deliver.Waves are indeed perceptible, but they need to be much more intense: ESD for example. The spark from touching a grounded object propagates over and through your body, near the speed of light, giving a risetime of some nanoseconds. The peak power is in the megawatts, enough to ionize air (hence the spark), and some skin around the contact area (not enough to notice from single hits, but the burn from multiple hits can be particularly destructive, e.g. RF burns). Over a longer time scale, as things settle down, the charge delivered by this pulse causes ionic separation/motion in your tissues -- evident as the intense pain and sudden movement as it affects your nerves and muscles.The human body in general is rather insensitive to electromagnetic fields, actually. Fortunately, I guess. Aside from visible light of course, and from frequencies low enough to affect the nervous system directly (<kHz) -- which by their nature, are almost impossible to carry through air alone, and need some contact to deliver real charge.Note we can reduce the transient model to an average equivalent at low frequencies. And here, it simply suffices to note that, the capacitance between say your finger and the wires in a piece of romex, is a couple pF at most, and at 120 even 240V, is just some microamperes, well below sensitivity threshold.Tim

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 12:33:41 am
content: Took College course, along those lines.Please also see 'Fields and Waves in Modern...Electronics'By Winnery and Van Duzer. (spell check!)It is more advanced than I can handle, fully, but in catagory, of, like 90 % beginning and medium level physics.The main gist, of any energy flow, by itself without conductor, is a kind of 'chasing own tail' dynamic:The changing electro field causes, or generates, a resulting changing magnetic field. That then continues, as that changing magnetic field, in turn creates a changing electric field.That perpetuates, and all the 'Maxwell's equations' describe that, in calculus 'rates' of change, 'd X /dt',for the two field types. That, of course, relating directly to 'c', the standard speed of light. Light waves being EM waves, of course.You could, I guess, say that the 'magnetic field is time-varying, this inducing an electric field.'Then, just say 'This field pushes electrons, in the nearby conductor. Nearby insulation, not so much resulting flow, (from the e field).Ok, then just say "That new electric current then, being time varying, will cause a NEW magnetic field, to expand around the insulated conductor."That gets you to perceive the continuous, remake of those EM fields, that's the 'propagation' over nearby distance, all happening at light-speed.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 01:48:41 am
content: I almost have it right. As some others here, are almost correct.I'd have to say: That the energy is partially held, in the wire, by the current , let's say it comes from 1 MHZ signal generator, 1 volt pk to ok. As that goes down the wire, as mentioned, d V/dt causing d u/dt (magnetic), causing, yet more d V/dt, in circular fashion, I think that cyclically, the energy IS not right in the wire, but soon will be. Looking at one single point, you observe the wax and wane, SINE shaped voltage wave, moving past your sample point. Plus with magnetic sensor a similar SINE wave, I believe 90 degrees offset, (hypothetical 1 Mhz).However, energy does not travel speed of light, when carried by a cable, coax or twisted pair...EM speed is something like 70 % of 'c'.I guess, that slower speed is a kind of phase-lag, as the free space EM wave has to charge up each little segment if the cable, as it goes...but that's not a professional talking.The experts talk, also, about 'phase' velocity vs wave speed...way over my head and pay scale.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 04:03:57 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 01, 2022, 10:26:19 pmThis is the question I was hoping we would get to. I propose that we cannot get shocked unless some "energy" is being transferred to/from us. Since we don't get shocked unless we touch a bare conductor there must be some "energy" in or on the conductor. What is that "energy"?

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 04:19:13 pm
content: Birds perched directly on a single overhead wire from a utility pole do not get shocked.The phenomenon of being "shocked" results from current flowing through the body.In my MRI days, I spent time in very strong static magnetic fields, between 0.5 T and 20 T (5 kG to 20 kG). (The earth's magnetic field is < 1 G.)(The common procedure was that the physicist should volunteer to be in the magnet while the engineers did the adjustments and ran the tests.)The effect of these strong fields was evident: I once set a tweezers down on the couch and it went flying into the bore. The techs were forever finding paper clips that had been carelessly left behind.When locating a non-ferromagnetic object (aluminum box with brass screws) near the magnet, the reaction force from eddy currents when the box was moving could be felt easily.Besides the effect of these strong fields on ferrous object (such as surgical implants), the main safety worries were the E-field induced in the patient by the time-changing gradient magnetic fields used for imaging, and the high-frequency currents induced in the patient's conductive material (basically, saline solution) from the pulsed RF magnetic field that dissipated heat in the tissues. In extreme cases, where a defective RF coil structure focused the AC field, this could cause a burn. Of course, an extreme failure of the hardware could result in a direct connection to the patient and shock him, but this is extremely rare.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 09:28:36 pm
content: This, AGAIN?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 10:24:30 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 02, 2022, 04:03:57 pmElectric energy near a wire is 3 things.(1) It is the energy in the em radiation surrounding the wire. We don’t know what this em radiation is, but it produces an electric force (due to what we call charge), & it produces a magnetic force (a mmf). It gives us radio waves.(2) It is the energy of the(negatively charged) elektons on the wire, ie photons hugging the wire. These elektons can produce a force directly (ie by contact), or indirectly via their em radiation. Strictly speaking there is no such thing as contact, contact is via em radiation.(3) It is the energy of the electrons on the surface of the wire.Forces give us energy, & energy gives us forces.Aether gives us photons (the fundamental particle)(or quasi particle)(electrons & quarks etc being the fundamental particle if u like), & the em radiation emitted by photons. Photons etc are an excitation of aether.Praether is the fundamental essence, & it gives us aether (an excitation of the praether).Everything that we see & feel has mass.Except gravity, gravity aint got no mass. Gravity is due to the acceleration of the bulk flow of aether, aether flowing into matter (where aether is annihilated).If something annihilates aether then that something has mass, & everything annihilates aether (ie everything has mass)(except that gravity has zero mass)(unless u believe in a contractile aether, but i wont go into that).Em radiation has mass, photons have mass, electrons & elektrons & elektons have mass, if not then we would not have electricity or elektricity or elekticity, ie we would not have electric forces, ie we would not have electric energy.However, gravity & gravity force, & gravitational energy do not play a part in electric energy.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 11:07:00 pm
content: Quote from: eti on April 02, 2022, 09:28:36 pmFeels like it started off ok, but will quickly turn back into

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 12:13:41 am
content: So...Is there a textbook / Univ. Course available, describing 'aether', as I am ignorant, there.Or, if it's controversial, what dynamic exists ? Unfair established physicists ? Any medical implications, that folks don't usually hear about ?I'm just saying...(That's the kind of reactive comments I've gotten. I just tolerate it...I'm flawed too.)

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 01:54:16 am
content: Quote from: RJHayward on April 03, 2022, 12:13:41 amAether aint gonna change anything much. But aether might help to explain things, & it might help with new discoveries, inventions etc.The aetherwind plus my elektons explains why the speed of elekticity along a wire varies with direction (due to the aetherwind)(the aetherwind is 500 km/s, ie c/600). Photons (eg elektons) propagate at the speed of light in the aether, hence a photon (& elekticity) will have a speed of c+V or c-V for a tailwind or headwind.If an aether then no STR, & no GTR (or most of it). But i don’t know of any uni course that considers that aether is real. They come close, ie when they talk of quantum foam, or dynamic space etc.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 02:42:41 am
content: Sorry, but I'm relegating this, into the'Tolerance Folder'. You can't waste my time, and others ('eti' also expressed that, approx.), with your narrative relating to Physics, in ABSENCE of any other reference text, reference credentialed professor, reference diagrams, ANYTHING.I admit, My presentations are bad, partially, but: Did anybody make suggestions, before ? I mean, that got ignored?Because, short of any more reading your dialog, I'm outa here¥

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 05:15:32 am
content: Quote from: RJHayward on April 03, 2022, 02:42:41 am"Aether" is a disproven hypothesis positing that the universe has a unique reference frame, and thus effects carried by that medium -- electromagnetism, or maybe gravity too, sure why not* -- show effects with respect to it. This was a very reasonable supposition at the time -- wave mechanics were well known in the study of matter-based media, i.e. acoustic waves, gravity waves, etc. In these phenomena, waves move with respect to the stuff of the medium itself, thus e.g. waves on a flowing river propagate faster (with respect to stationary ground) in the direction of flow. Put another way: you get a Doppler effect all for free, when the medium is in relative motion.*Aether predates relativity, but if they had known of gravitational waves at the time (or, really just been hinted at the possibility of such -- it's not much of a leap to suppose gravity might be carried by waves too), they'd have probably lumped it in as well. Now, whether gravity has its own aether or is in fact the same as EM, wouldn't be so easy to determine given the information at the time.EM aether theory was soundly considered disproven, after a series of experiments using interferometry to measure this supposed Doppler shift, gave a null result to extremely tight bounds: a modest fraction of the tangential velocity of the Earth. Since the Earth is constantly in non-inertial motion (i.e. rotation on its axis and orbit), we should have no expectation that any particular time of day or year shows a consistent aether current with respect to it; and yet the observation was zero in all cases, no periodic change.By this time (early 1900s), Einstein introduced Relativity; which, if you like, describes a kind of "aether", but one that is relative to any observer, specifically excluding any sort of unique or universal frame of reference. A medium we today call spacetime. Perhaps you could rescue "aether" by saying it's drawn along by any matter doing the observing, but that's quite a stretch. Whereas the field equations are fully described and complete: as simple as can be, but no simpler.Alternately, in the context of field theories, the field itself is a particular property of the universe, carrying waves of that particular type (i.e. EM waves, electron waves, quark waves, etc..), and coupling to other fields. In a sense, these could be considered "aethers", and it turns out we have not one but many, one for each fundamental particle. But this is, again, severely straining the usual meaning of "aether", and hence we call them what we do today -- particle fields. These of course obey relativity (no special frame of reference, Lorentz invariant), at least the ones incorporating it such that they can. (For example, you can take bog-standard quantum mechanics, which does not; but rolling in SR, and quite a lot of work later, you get QED, Quantum ElectroDynamics, a theory which describes to essentially exactness, essentially all of our everyday experience. Adding the weak and strong fields, with their corresponding particles, and you get basically the Standard Model as we know it today, accommodating everything from atom smashing in particle accelerators, to neutron stars, and the first vanishingly small timesteps since the Big Bang. It only leaves out GR, which has so far proven a tough fit with traditional field theories, and so mostly sits alongside on its own, in the Standard Model.)I don't know (or care, frankly) if this [historical aether theories] is what aetherist is trying to promote here, but I agree with the conclusion that it is likely not worth ones' time. (Or if you've properly set this thread on ignore, then consider this an FYI for all you other readers who should happen upon this thread.)Tim

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 05:29:54 am
content: Wow, thanks for spending that detailed time!I wasn't aware I could put a block, on a THREAD, that's a useful item.Blown away, by the HISTORY and expertise, thanks Dave, and Tim.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 05:51:47 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on April 03, 2022, 05:15:32 amThanks. I had never even hear the word "Aether" before. I wasn't sure of the exact date, but knew April 1st was close and had to double check my calendar. Aetherist, I do appreciate your input too, but I would really like to stick to what has been proven. Based on what I've read here, I would really like the answer nigelwright7557 gave to be true because it is concise and it makes sense based on what I think I know:Quote from: nigelwright7557If this is true then it just seems the videos are a bit over zealous with their insinuation that all energy is outside the wire.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 06:26:04 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on April 03, 2022, 05:15:32 amThe aetherwind has been detected in every proper MMX, the best i think being by Demjanov in 1968-72.MMXs need to be in gas mode (Prof Reg Cahill, Adelaide). The modern vacuum versions of MMXs will not (did not)(could not) find any signal (vacuum can however give a very weak signal).The aether provides an absolute reference frame, but it is not a universal reference frame, it is only a local reference frame, very local, koz the aetherwind changes with time & place, everywhere. The local background aetherwind is approx 500 km/s south to north approx 20 deg off Earth's axis. Demjanov found it to vary from 140 km/s to 480 km/s during a day (at Obninsk)(measured in the horizontal).Aether is not dragged by matter, at least not by matter moving at a constant velocity. Acceleration does however drag aether.The aether need not be called the luminiferous aether -- the aether gives us everything we see & feel. It is a gravitational aether, it is an electric aether, it is a magnetic aether. It is simply the aether.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 03:41:37 pm
content: Yes, but you didn't read a word, of that whole page you just quoted. So we readers get to wade through THAT copied page+ and then...A completely disjointed narration sounding like a history book....MMX had measured blah, blah blah.What's MMX ? Is that where 2 men fight, in a ring, using skateboards ? That was measured change to the 'hot air WIND', at 100.678 per. There.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 04:48:51 pm
content: Looking at the video, realized that the EM WAVES are in phase, so Electric and Magnetic, at any one point you choose, are both oscillating in phase. So the peak strengths both at same time.I almost think, by now, this needs a voting system...But my take is:Looking at one point, say, on a COAX cable, there are times, when there is no field, as SINE shaped wave vibrates down the wire. Opposite to that, there are times when there is no current, in the wire.In my view, any current, time varying, produces the magnetic field, expands around the coax, or other configured cable, like twisted pair. So it's both, outside wire, by fields moving, and in the wire, during times the electrons move. Electrons are moving in little back and forth oscillations, so there is a time (instant) when current is zero, ... then it reverses direction.So both parameters are 'not' there, at certain instants, but the whole SINE wave is definitely there, moving past your vantage point. Moving as a current, in the wire, that's going to be the FORCE, of the current, not an electron mass pushing or anything; actual electron current is very slow, relatively.And then, also, the energy, for doing work, moves outside the wire too. In fact, it's that moving field, in my opinion, that continually renews the wire's internal field and resulting current. Same thing the other way; sometimes the external fields are zero, and they get renewed, by the wire's current.All relates to that old idiom, about a lion chasing its tail. Both processes renew each other, in turn, going down the transmission line, or when considering one point in the line.Like I said: sometimes there is no field, but soon there will be, (as the SINE shaped wave builds back up).

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 06:29:18 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on April 03, 2022, 06:26:04 amYeah, so it's 42.But I'm curious about what this "theory" brings to the table, apart from saying that it's everywhere and is everything.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 08:07:16 pm
content: Wizard:My answer is that NOW, I'm curious about how to activate 'Block this Post author'...while still having normal access, to that thread..

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:33:13 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 03, 2022, 06:29:18 pmAether theory might help to explain lots of things. Re elekticity it explains why the speed of elekticity along a wire depends on the time of day.If an aether then STR can't be true. If STR can't be true then i think that most of GTR can't be true.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:38:17 pm
content: Go to your profile. Buddies/Ignore List. Edit Ignore List. Add username.Threads can be ignored by ticking the thread in your "view new replies|unread posts" list and clicking the ignore button. They'll still show up in the plain forum sections, or search or whatever if you go looking, and can be clicked or removed in a similar location from your profile.Tim

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:38:31 pm
content: Does it also depend on whether one's latitude is N or S?

author: bsfeechannel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:40:39 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 03, 2022, 05:51:47 amThe video is not insinuating. The energy that is transferred to the load IS outside the wires. If it were inside the wires, it would be dissipated by them.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:44:46 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on April 03, 2022, 03:41:37 pmAether experiments in the oldendays were done based on the interferometer invented by Michelson. He did the first such X in 1881, u could call this an MX. Then he did others with Morley, u could call these MMXs. Then Morley did some with Miller, u could call these MMXs. Then Miller did some on his own, ie MXs. Then Michelson did some on his own, ie MXs. I sometimes call them MMMXs, koz of the three main guys involved over the years. But they are often referred to as MMXs. Modern versions are not usually called MMXs, unless they work much the same way as the oldendays Xs.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 09:52:56 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 03, 2022, 09:38:31 pmYes, the background aetherwind blows at say 500 km/s say 20 deg off Earth's axis.Hence the horizontal component will depend on where u are on Earth, & what time of day (& what season of the year)(due to Earth's orbit).Demjanov found that the horizontal component of the wind at Obninsk had a low of 140 km/s & a hi of 480 km/s.My electons propagate at the speed of light, hence they could have a speed of c+480 or a speed of c-480, at Obninsk, during 24 hrs, depending on the direction of the (horizontal) wire.If u happened to be at a location where the aetherwind was vertical, then there would be almost zero effect on the speed of elekticity, it would be slowed a little due to the elektons having a sidewind.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 10:07:09 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on April 03, 2022, 09:38:17 pmIgnoring me or my threads is ok.But i hope that i can then still comment/post on RJHayward's postings on other threads. I am learning lots & lots from his postings.Can RJH block me from posting on his postings?Can he block me from reading his postings?Can i block RJH from reading my postings?

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 10:18:39 pm
content: Do as you will.But I just looked up the word:'Confrontational'....after reading local paper Police Report

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 10:48:35 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on April 03, 2022, 10:18:39 pmch for: What is the meaning of being confrontational?What do you call a confrontational person?Characterized by, or given to initiating hostile encounters. aggressive. bellicose. combative. hostile. Often avoids genuine argument by putting others on "ignore".

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 11:23:22 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 03, 2022, 06:29:18 pmI did some internet diving into this particular conspiracy theory.It explains after the fact every microscopic experimental discrepancy, error, or drift with a quantity that can take on any magnitude and direction at any point in time and so while in principle it is testable (per the original Michelson morely experiment aka MMX, since all experiments have errors and uncertainty and there is no lower bound for the aether velocity at your location no experiment can be inconsistent with it. It also claims without justification that you need to do the experiment in specific ways such as in vacuum which makes no difference but reduces the number of people who can practically do the experiment dramatically and those that could largely have better things to do. More complex results such as the operation of GPS or particle accelerators are hand waved away as well explained by aether theory but without any actual quantitative theory that can predict any of them.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 12:15:13 am
content: Quote from: ejeffrey on April 03, 2022, 11:23:22 pmIt is true that a perfectly good MMX can get a null result, if the aetherwind is vertical at that location at that time, koz MMXs are usually done in the horizontal.Likewise, at some locations on Earth (near the equator) the horizontal component of the aetherwind will have its full value, approx 500 km/s.Prof Reg Cahill (Adelaide) was the first to publish the correct calibration for MMXs, & he showed that they had to be in gas mode, ie vacuum mode gave a null result (or very nearly null).I am the world authority on some aspects of spurious signals & noise & error in MMXs. And i can set u straight on any such aspect if u want.GPS proves that STR is wrong. I am not sure whether GPS supports aetherwind (i can't remember).I don’t know of any arguments involving particle accelerators & aether or aetherwind.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 03:32:33 am
content: Quote from: bsfeechannel on April 03, 2022, 09:40:39 pmAh, a post about the subject of the thread... coolThis response though seems to miss the head scratching aspect of my original question; if the "energy" is outside the wire why doesn't it affect us until we touch the bare wire? I'm also assuming when you say "outside the wire" you meanreallyoutside (i.e. outside the insulation) and not justonthe outside of the wire (i.e. on its surface).

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 04:00:03 am
content: Well like I said, it does, just you can't notice it.Also that it's mostly outside you, as well as the wire. A wavefront propagating through air, will mostly be reflected off the high dielectric constant of your skin. To microwaves (we're talking ~ps scale risetimes here), you look like the Silver Surfer. Or like a balloon of, well, mostly water.And what's left, that does penetrate, dissipates quickly, absorbed as heat -- no neuronal activation, there's many orders of magnitude not enough charge deposited to activate them. The only thing that does, is either an intense enough beam to cause physical heating (active denial system for example), or an intense enough impulse that, as the charges slowly settle down, you do feel something (a static spark).For wavefronts that change more slowly, the penetration depth is greater of course, but also your body is more blobby, fingers and hands becoming less distinct as the wavelength becomes longer than their dimensions. (It takes ~THz to resolve fingerprints.) Or, for many waves superimposed, the ratio of electric and magnetic fields can become proportionally farther out of whack, and this field strength need not come at any power cost, i.e. it is a reactive effect only. At mains frequency for example, compared to a nanosecond wavefront, there's effectively billions of waves superimposed, most of them cancelling out, and that's why you don't feel anything.Tim

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 01:48:29 pm
content: Again, a human body can be "shocked" when current flows through it.In a simple situation, the victim's hand touches a wire that has a substantial voltage with respect to ground, and the victim's body is "grounded" elsewhere, possibly by standing in a puddle of water.The current that flows through the body then determines the severity of the shock: a low current is unpleasant and can induce an involuntary muscle reaction, a higher current is lethal because it interferes with proper heart function.For a given voltage, the current depends on the total impedance through the circuit.At DC, with an insulated wire, the insulation of the wire should be extremely large with respect to the resistance through the body.At 60 Hz AC, the capacitance through the insulation might be important.At RF, the displacement current through the capacitance increases.Homework assignment: calculate the insulation impedance at DC and 60 Hz for a simplified model where the insulation is modeled as a coaxial annular cylinder about 10 cm long (approximate width of a hand), with typical dimensions on an AWG12 wire with PVC insulation.For the body resistance, that depends on how wet the skin is, since the resistance of dry skin is much larger than the resistance through the wetter interior of the body (roughly, "normal" saline).

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 02:39:20 pm
content: The insulation protects you from closing a circuit (you are a resistor). At the same time there's an electromagnetic field which can impact you (you are an antenna or conductor). In most cases the field strength is too small to have any noticeable impact. But this changes with a very high field strength (frequency plays also a role). Or in other words, if the field strength is large enough you'll sense pain. Most countries defined limits for each field strength. For example, our limit for the electrical field strength at freqencies of 1-50 Hz is 5 kV/m.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 03:30:01 pm
content: In the regulation of MRI, the relevant parameter is "SAR", which is the energy absorbed from the high-frequency magnetic field per kg of body mass. This energy goes to heating the body tissue which, in extreme cases, can cause burns.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 06:06:08 pm
content: Thanks, timfox, RF can be invisible danger.I'm wanting to mention, recent a person posted some discussion about a DC Lamp. Uh, OK that could happen, in an RV (12 V automotive), or in uh, a TENT or something. But that is misleading / distraction as we generally are discussing AC transmission of energy.That's why you get the TWO effects, basic physics.One effect, the AC current, time varying, causing fieldfluctuations surrounding the current flow (in wire) and other transmission directly inside the wire. Both will wax and wane, so you can always make the case that one or the other 'goes through zero volts point', on waveform (SINE if it's free of noise etc). OR, you can always say the magnetic field fluctuation goes through zero field strength, too, as it transitions to a (sinusoidal) negative half of waveform. All cyclic.Yeah, so how, again, does bringing up DC relate, to a pair of sinusoidally vibrating field/ and current (??).

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 06:21:28 pm
content: The 'other' faulty / misleading post on my mind right now, states "...it can't be transmitted through wires 'cause they will just 'disapate' it all, in internal resistance.".Uh, I ran the numbers, for that (sigh...), it's not that hard to multiply and comes to something like 10 ohms series cable transmission wire resistance added to a 240 ohm load resistance for a 60 Watt bulb.That's for a 100 foot length and MY numbers say that the wires have only 4 % while the LOAD at end of cable recieves fully 96 %.As the saying goes: Prove me wrong! Please, for the sake of the OP :"Publish Your Numbers" ! So we can examine, here.

author: bsfeechannel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 06:40:28 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 04, 2022, 03:32:33 amIt's because you too are a conductor and the electric field inside you must be zero, forcing the energy to circle around you.When you touch the wire you provide a way for the electric field be in parallel with your skin, effectively pointing the flow of energy into your body, in which case you get barbecued.QuoteNope. Energy flows through the insulation too, since it can admit the presence of an electric and a magnetic field.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 07:54:17 pm
content: Ah, thank you, bsfeechannel.That explanation provides a way, to start thinking about the electric 'Model' for the two cases of contact.First case being simple contact, with another contact to a ground, or a second metal conductor. That's the more 'classic' case, where you can figure out a clear path, unfortunately going through a person, to wet floor etc.The other situation, RF, my thought is that you could 'touch' the cable wire, but by way of a bunch of capacitors, conducting current easy due to RF high frequency. So, no need to look directly, for a 2nd conductor to contact...the RF can 'find' that 2nd place, where the RF has little impedance, like an insulated shoe bottom, having enough capacitance to put person in danger, and the person's body then is conductor via the tissues and fluids.My body model could start there, place a capacitor to ground (wet floor containing steel rebar), and MODEL the body as a resistor, at, say 500 ohms. THEN, on other end, another capacitor, to the cable metal inner wire; that would 'model' the insulation.Result looks like CAP--Resistor--CAP and then you run your numbers, at RF frequency.Skin effect, is too complex for me to lecture on, but I can understand portion of others explanation about RF burns. (I think that's in the skin surface, ...a separate consideration, using same word, as skin effect generally for some surface, like a cup or outside of a RF coax.)That model was very simple, but point being RF doesn't necessarily need a visably 'complete' conductor around the circuit, (to convey the burns).

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 08:22:02 pm
content: Well, when you touch an object, I don't think you're ever in full "contact" with the underlying material at the atomic scale. There are a lot more gaps than points of contact, I think. You're just getting "very close".

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 08:42:18 pm
content: When human skin touches a metal object, much of the electrical contact is through water (saline solution in sweat).At the "atomic scale" (0.1 nm) the electrons move about in the environment.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 08:52:17 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 04, 2022, 08:42:18 pmYes, which is why the impedance directly depends on how dry/wet(/oily...) your skin is.But that water interface with ions opens a whole other can of worms.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 09:28:00 pm
content: Back in high school, we amused ourselves with "lie detection" by gripping the two probes of a Simpson 260 on its highest megohm scale: the resistance varied considerably depending on the skin moisture content.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 10:22:17 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 04, 2022, 08:42:18 pmWhat i reckon happens is that elektons jump from the surface of the metal & into the water where they then become orbiting photons orbiting the water nuclei (the orbiting photons are wrongly called electrons), ie creating ions (negatively charged water molecules), & these ions drift slowly along through the water (at say 1 mm/s). However, the drifting ions create an electric current, & this current has a wavefront propagating very fast through the water (at say c/100).Hence the electricity found flowing through water is similar to the old (electron) electricity which supposedly flows along a wire. But in the case of water the drifting ions idea (of electricity) is correct. Whereas in a wire the drifting electrons idea (of electricity) is wrong.Electrons do not orbit nuclei, photons (elektrons) orbit nuclei.Electrons are photons that have formed a loop by biting their own tail.Electrons are photons that orbit nothing, they go round & round, but don’t orbit anything physical. In that sense an electron is free to move, albeit as directed by its own negative charge.An orbiting photon is not free to move. Except that a conduction elektron is free-ish i suppose.We all call it a conduction elektron, praps a conduction photon duz take the form of an electron when it breaks free of the nucleus , in which case they are indeed conduction electrons.Free surface electrons are almost certainly electrons. Still thinking.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 10:27:46 pm
content: This reads more like mythology than physics, especially the tail-biting.Remember that ionic solutions have substantial conductivity.The relationship between electric fieldEand current densityJin a conductor isJ= (sigma)xE, whereEandJare vectors (Ohm's Law).In an isotropic medium, "sigma" is a scalar, but in an anisotropic conductor (e.g., graphite), it is a tensor.Drifting electrons in a metal or semiconductor (rather important for electronic engineering):At normal field values within the metal, the charge carriers do not accelerate in the same manner that they accelerate between cathode and anode of a cathode-ray tube, but they reach a terminal velocity (due to scattering from impurities and other solid-state physics phenomena) that is proportional to theEfield. (At very high fields, the proportionality breaks down.)The Hall effect is useful here: it can differentiate between electrons moving one way and holes (positive charge carriers) moving the other way, even though the electrical current is in the same direction, and shows that charge carriers within a conducting metal wire are, in fact, electrons. (Both types of charge carriers occur in semiconductor devices.)

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 10:42:52 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 04, 2022, 10:27:46 pmYes. I wasn’t sure how to break it to u. That electrons don’t orbit nuclei. The orbiting is done by photons.However, u will be pleased to know that free electrons do exist.Orbiting photons solves a deep mystery that used to keep me awake at night. How can an orbital electron absorb the energy of a photon, & then re-emit that photon. The simplest solution is that the photon is absorbed by an orbiting photon. Or is not absorbed at all but merely joins its mates. First the elekton. Now the orbiting photon. U can't stop genius.I think that drifting elektrons might exist in a metal. Here the orbiting conduction photons might have to break free & form free electrons by biting their own tails, at least briefly. I think that that could happen on the surface of the metal, but praps inside also. I can go along with that. But, electrons do not orbit nuclei.Ok everybody sit down & stay calm & listen. There is no need to panic. Electricity is safe. Here is a summary.Photons can exist in many ways.(1) Free photons (zero charge in the far field).(2) Elektons (photons hugging the surface of a metal)(negative charge).(3) Orbiting photons (elektrons hugging a nuclei instead of the surface of a metal)(negative charge).(4) Electrons (photons that have formed a loop)(the photon orbits around nothing)(negative charge).(5) Positrons (positive charge)(electrons that are twisted inside out).(6) Neutrinos (pairs of photons sharing the same helical axis)(zero charge in the near field & in the far field)(7) Positons (positive charge)(elektrons that are twisted inside out).(8 ) The photon is the building block for all elementary particles (quarks, muons etc)

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 10:53:24 pm
content: The straw horse of "orbiting electrons", such as seen in graphics for atomic energy organizations, is not to be taken literally in the sense of the Moon orbiting the Earth. The first quantum explanation of atomic structure by Neils Bohr gave some reasonable results, but there has been a lot of work done in the last century.Have you ever studied quantum mechanics? The proper discussion of atomic structure is not easily found in comic-book illustrations, but the modern theory predicts spectroscopic results to incredible accuracy.For example, the "Lamb shift", the energy difference between the two states 2S1/2and 2P1/2, which would be equal by simple quantum mechanics, was explained by later QED (quantum electrodynamics) and the predicted value of only 1057.864 MHz agrees with measurement to 1 ppm or so.This article gives more than you want to know about this phenomenon:https://quantummechanics.ucsd.edu/ph130a/130_notes/node476.html

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 11:08:24 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 04, 2022, 10:53:24 pmI don’t know enough (math etc) to be able to study Quantum stuff, so i don’t understand any of it.But i know that some scientists don’t like the idea of an atom having a nucleus, & some don’t like the idea of electrons orbiting a nucleus.I think that atomic energy is a safer term than nuclear energy.Some scientists don’t like the idea of electrons. They might concede that there is a kind of electron effect, but that it is due to rolled up em radiation or somesuch (which aint far from my "biting its own tail")Jeans said that matter was bottled light.I don’t like all of the theoretical particles & virtual particles demanded by Quantum stuff.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2022, 11:35:01 pm
content: "You're the expert, but a lotta guys..."

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 02:49:00 pm
content: So, rhetorical question, is "current" a measure of energy? Since the answer is "yes", how is it that a 10 AWG solid core wire will carry more amperage than a 10 AWG stranded wire, yet the stranded wire has more surface area?

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 03:40:11 pm
content: No, "current" is not a measure of energy.In normal electrical units, the "watt-second" is energy, usually referred to in physics as the "Joule".

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 03:41:37 pm
content: "I don’t like all of the theoretical particles & virtual particles demanded by Quantum stuff."Another in a series of arguments by several posters that they find something to be "icky" and therefore refuse to deal with it.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 04:31:56 pm
content: Current is a measure of energy in the sense that it's energy per flux (volt-second). You wouldn't say that a displacement, or a force, is a measure of energy, any more than one is contingent on the other: their product (given a few others conditions) being energy. Or velocity being more analogous to current, the product with potential being power, hence needing time to get energy from voltage and current.So for example, the say 6AWG or so wires used for overhead power lines -- these might be good for 50A in in-wall electrical wiring, which at 120/240V is merely 6/12kVA capacity. Up on the poles, with free air and ceramic insulators, it takes more current for the same temperature rise, or they may be allowed to run hotter besides, and so distribution lines might run 100A. Carrying 4800V or more, you get capacity upwards of half an MVA quite easily.Meanwhile, even though the current and thus voltage drop might be higher, the fact that the system voltage is 20+ times higher, means the voltage drop is 10+ times smallerin relative terms, thus the transmission efficiency is extremely high, suitable for distances of tens of miles.This says nothing of stranded; for mains purposes, there's no difference, the wire is jacketed and the jacket is only slightly larger for stranded, so its temp rise is hardly different. At low frequencies (DC and mains, except for the largest conductors), current flows in the entire cross-section, which is equivalent (they're both called "6AWG" for a reason).There is some truth to the assertion at higher frequencies, however. Skin effect forces current to flow on the surface of the conductor. A stranded 6AWG wire might have say 10-20% less AC resistance at, oh, a few kHz, compared to solid. It's not much, but it is something. Even better if the strands are fine and individually insulated (litz), in which case the cable might have AC resistance not much higher than DCR, even at a few 100 kHz (where the solid wire is naught but a thin tube, electrically speaking).(The largest transmission lines use conductors the size of your forearm, typically using aluminum for lighter weight, built around a steel core for strength. The build is stranded for flexibility, which again also increases the skin depth somewhat; but again, this is a small difference, and when quite high currents are required (several thousand amperes), multiple conductors are used in parallel, spaced out a bit so that their magnetic fields don't affect each other quite so much (proximity effect, basically skin effect but for strands a bit further apart from each other). The increased effective diameter of the bundle also reduces electric field and thus corona discharge -- these are very high voltages indeed, pushing a megavolt. Such lines can transmit the power of whole power stations (gigawatts), or indeed some entire countries.)Tim

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 04:52:52 pm
content: Even at 60 Hz, skin effect can have a measurable effect on the electrical loss in copper for diameters exceeding, say, 20 mm (500 mcm).At twice that diameter (2000 mcm copper wire), the resistance at 60 Hz increases by about 23% over that at DC.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 10:06:33 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 07, 2022, 02:49:00 pm1. Do tests show that a solid core will melt (or something) at more Volts than a stranded? 2. Is this for Cu? 3. Is this for DC? 4. Is this for bare wires (ie not insulated)? 5. Is your question aimed at my new (elekton) elekticity theory? If my 5 questions all get a YES, then i might be able to answer your question (in my usual amateurish way).I suspect that for the same Voltage stranded will result in more Amps, koz it has less resistance than solid.And if heat loss depends on I*I*R then stranded will produce more heat than solid.U said that solid will carry more amps, but i will ignore that.If the R of stranded is 9, & solid is 10, & V is 100, then I in stranded is 11, & I in solid is 10, & heat in stranded is 11*11*9, which is 1089, & heat in solid is 10*10*10, which is 1000.Hence the stranded will/might melt before the solid melts.Another way of looking at it (depending on how the question is framed). Stranded wire might not carry as much voltage as solid (in some circumstances), koz if the stranded has sharper bends (somewhere along the line) then elektons are more likely to jump away from the stranded & not return, this loss of elektons problem being magnified by the rougher surface of stranded.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 10:19:39 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 07, 2022, 03:41:37 pmCan quantum stuff explain how insulation prevents electrocution?Can quantum stuff explain my new (elekton) elekticity, ie can it explain how a photon can be constrained in 2 dimensions (ie on a surface), ie can it explain that a photon can hug a wire?

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 07, 2022, 10:35:23 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on April 07, 2022, 10:19:39 pm1. Quantum solid-state physics describes how insulators work and differ from conductors, so the answer is yes.2. Quantum stuff cannot explain nonsensical theories with no experimental evidence to back them, so the answer is no.

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 03:42:04 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 07, 2022, 03:40:11 pmAn excerpt fromWikipedia's Electrical Energyarticle: "Electrical energy is energy derived as a result of movement of electrically charged particles."An excerpt fromWikipedia's Electric Currentarticle: "An electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space."By those definitions and, I would argue, any common definition of "energy", current must be considered energy. Sorry if I'm being thick Tim (I really want to understand this, that is why I keep asking questions about things that don't seem to jive), but what is it about the definition of energy that makes it not apply to the definition of current, based on your understanding?

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 05:55:36 am
content: In a colloquial sense, it's things in motion; having energy. But that's different from an amount of energy in joules or whatever.Have you dome intro physics, mechanics? Definition of position/velocity/acceleration, Newton's laws, etc.? That's a good place to start.Tim

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 12:30:42 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 08, 2022, 03:42:04 am"Energy" is a defined term in physics, and I follow that definition. As an example, the velocity of an automobile is not its energy. The kinetic energy of the automobile isE= (1/2)mv2, which depends on both the massmand the velocityv. Increasing the velocity increases the energy, but is not the energy itself. This is careful, not pedantic, usage of the word "energy". In popular usage, breakfast cereal gives a child "energy", but that is not scientific usage.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 01:01:39 pm
content: And to be clear -- I don't mean to patronize or belittle, I honestly don't know your education level so don't know where to start. Energy is an abstract concept, it's not trivial to understand; it takes time and care to develop. It's a sizable part of the relevant HS/college level classes, for good reason! And well worth reading up on, if you haven't worked with it before (or in a while; a refresher is always welcome, too!).Not sure what the best resources are these days; there's always Wikipedia and Hyperphysics, though they have the downside of tending to present information from within the domain itself, so aren't always that approachable from the outside.Tim

author: typoknig
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 06:07:44 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 08, 2022, 12:30:42 pmCan you provide a reference to the physics definition? I'm assuming you are saying it doesn't match the definition provided in the Wikipedia articles I referenced? I dusted off my physics book (Cutnell & Johnson Physics, 6th Edition, (C) 2004) and its definition can be seen in the attached picture.I guess I could maybe see how someone could/would not consider current "energy" by this definition since it is the field causing the particles to move, but I think it is a stretch. Once the electrons are moving, they have had "some" energy imparted to them, so even if the field is what caused them to move in the first place, if the field is removed there will be some span of time (short as it may be) that the electrons will still be flowing, correct?

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 06:33:13 pm
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 08, 2022, 06:07:44 pmThe definition of energy is fundamental, and is addressed in any introductory physics or thermodynamics text. This is not an area where Wikipedia should be a primary reference (all Wikipedia articles have to refer to primary sources for any facts they give, so you might consider following the references to primary sources given in Wiki articles).It is, incidentally, the case that nobody really knows what energy "is". It is simply a quantity that has been observed through countless experiments to be conserved, and which obeys various rules that also have been determined by experiment. There is no intuitive way to say that the thermal energy in a hot cup of coffee is the same "stuff" as the chemical energy stored in a battery, but experimentally it is proven to be the case.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 09:44:45 pm
content: "Energy", "work", and "power" are rigorously defined in physics, in a manner that differs from common usage.For example, if you extend your arm and hold a weight in a constant location, you do no "work" on it, even though your body needs to metabolize food in order to maintain that position against gravity.In physics, workWis a scalar, given by the integral of the dot-product of the two vectorsF(force) andds(displacement), which means the product of the force and the component of displacement parallel to the force.If the path is a straight line, then this is justFxs, so the unit of work is force x distance: 1 J = 1 N-m."Energy" is the capacity to do work, but it has many forms, related by the usual law of conservation of energy. It has the same units, 1 J = 1 W-s = 1 N-m."Power" is the rate at which energy flows to do work, measured in Watts: 1 W = 1 J/sExamples:Kinetic energy (the energy of a mass in motion)Potential energy (could be gravitational or electric or from a spring, etc.)Chemical energy (stored in a battery)Thermal energy (energy of random motion in a substance at positive temperature)etc.In electric circuits, the voltageVis measured in Volts: 1 V = 1 J/C = 1 J/A-s where 1 Coulomb/second flow of current is 1 Ampere. The currentIis measured in Amperes: 1 A = 1 C/s.Therefore, the product ofVxIis the power in Watts. Checking the units, we have (1 J/C) x (1 C/s) = 1 J/s = 1 W.This corresponds to normal usage in electricity, which gives us the "kWh" = 3,600,000 J = (3600 sec/hr) x (1000 W/kW).Actually, the discussion in this Wikipedia article is a reasonable introduction:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2022, 10:10:03 pm
content: Energy in our world comes from the aether. And praps finally goes back into the aether.Aether has no mass, & we can't easily feel or see aether or the aetherwind, or the energy of the aether or aetherwind.But, we can see & feel energy in our world, koz of mass. If zero mass then zero energy.Movement is energy, but movement with zero mass is zero energy.Force is energy, but if zero mass then zero force & zero energy.Mass is vital for energy.And mass is usually needed for the transmission of energy.Photons annihilate aether, continuously, & all matter is made of photons. Hence all photons & all matter annihilates aether.Photons radiate em radiation, & em radiation too annihilates aether, & em radiation has mass.Mass is the property of annihilating aether.Aether has no mass, but aether transmits force tween masses.I have said before that gravity is due to the acceleration of the inflow of aether into matter. U can think of it as aether drag.But this aether drag process works both ways, the acceleration of matter creates aether drag, & here this too creates a force, which we call inertia.Inertia & gravity are the two faces of the same coin.Aether has no mass, but it transmits its tension or compression tween objects that do have mass.When i said that mass is vital for energy i should have said both kinds of mass, gravitational mass, & inertial mass.Gravitational mass involves the annihilation of aether, inertial mass duznt involve annihilation of aether.Time duznt exist, or, it duz exist, but is some kind of construct.What we have is movement, & movement gives us a construct that we interpret as being time.When i say time, i mean ticking. There is no such thing as time, what we have is ticking.On the other hand we do have time, but it is merely the present instant, which is universal (in our infinite eternal universe).Ticking (time) goes hand in hand with consciousness, & both are a mystery. And might always be a mystery.Energy is not conserved. In a way it is, but in a way it aint.Photons are created by the aether. They are an annihilation of the aether, together with being an excitation of the aether.Funny, photons are not a thing, they are a hole, which is the opposite of a thing, they are a hole in the aether, propagating at c in the aether.Em radiation (photaenos) is created by the aether. Photaenos are radiated from every photon, & it too is an annihilation of aether, a hole, or holes probly, think of the photon firing lots of continual machine gun bursts of photaenos.Photons & photaenos have energy, which has been created by the aether. And this/these energys are the source of all energy of all kinds that we see & feel in our world.And when photons die (there are a number of ways), their energy leaves our world. Hence there is no conservation of energy at creation nor at annihilation.An electron emits charge (the same charge) for ever. An electron has mass (the same mass) for ever, it has gravitational attraction for ever. This needs energy. Which comes from the aether. In that sense there is no conservation of energy.So, we have many kinds of force (in our world), many kinds of force fields, & each possesses or transmits energy.And energy is force or potential force, & energy is movement or potential movement.Force/energy. Time/movement. Chicken/egg. Consciousness/birth/death/infinity. This is the twilight zone.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2022, 10:43:29 pm
content: "Do I contradict myself?Very well then I contradict myself,(I am large, I contain multitudes.)I concentrate toward them that are nigh, I wait on the door-slab."(19th Century American poet) Walt Whitman:Song of Myself, 51

author: MegaVolt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 11, 2022, 10:24:17 am
content: Quote from: typoknig on April 08, 2022, 06:07:44 pmThere is an experiment. We quickly rotate the coil with the wire. Then we stop it abruptly. We will see a current pulse. It is caused by the movement of electrons by inertia.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 11, 2022, 10:11:47 pm
content: Quote from: MegaVolt on April 11, 2022, 10:24:17 amInteresting. So, the coil has no electric current, but has rotation. Then, abruptly, it has no rotation but has (a brief spike of) current.Is there a link to the details of such an X?Electrons (free-ish conduction elektrons)(& free-ish surface electrons) would due to inertia keep going CW or CCW & would thusly create a (brief) spike of current in one direction (say CW), until elektrons & electrons (charge) builds up at one end. Followed by a praps weaker spike (CCW) back the other way, & praps more (weaker) spikes until the sloshing to & fro reduces to zero.I am thinking that (see other thread) Purcell (book) would claim that the abrupt stop of rotation of the coil causes a circular form of his linear STR length contraction effect of his supposed STR charge source of emf around a current carrying wire. In which case Purcell would say that it (the abrupt stop of rotation) did not involve the inertia of electrons (not important)(no reply needed)(just saying).But i am interested in the details of the abrupt stopping of rotation cause of electricity.The abrupt stopping of the linear motion of a metal rod would i suppose usually be more violent, & would i suppose give even more such electricity than a spinning or rotating gizmo.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 11, 2022, 10:33:48 pm
content: Well, current if shorted. Voltage if open.Here's the keyword you need:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart%E2%80%93Tolman_effectSurprisingly (or perhaps not), Google produces wild results concerning "electron inertia" or "acceleration emf". The latter however led to a paper,https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/28/038/28038450.pdfwhich gives the name, and also an explanation/derivation of the effect.Tim

author: nigelwright7557
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2022, 08:45:23 pm
content: Quote from: andy3055 on April 01, 2022, 03:51:19 amThere are two fields outside the wire, the magnetic field and the electric field neither of which will shock you.