Electroboom: How Right IS Veritasium?! Don't Electrons Push Each Other??

[electrodacus]

I’m a microwave semiconductor engineer.  I use whatever model works for the given problem.

There is only one correct answer to that question.
The electrical energy either flows through wires or outside them.
Since electrical current is defined as a stream of electrons (unless anyone thinks that definition is wrong) and electrons travels through wires electrical energy also travels through wires.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest electrical energy travels outside the wires.
Free electrons traveling closer to the surface of the wires or even outside surface of the wire will still be considered inside the wire.

Derek has no idea what a capacitor is and completely ignored the line capacitance which was responsible for the effect he observed immediately after the switch was closed.
Even just moving the switch without closing the circuit will have created the same effect.

[rfeecs]

The electrical energy either flows through wires or outside them.

Hard to argue with that.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest electrical energy travels outside the wires.

Wrong.

You are endlessly repeating yourself.

As am I, I guess. 

[hamster_nz]

Since electrical current is defined as a stream of electrons (unless anyone thinks that definition is wrong) and electrons travels through wires electrical energy also travels through wires.

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

[electrodacus]

Wrong.

You are endlessly repeating yourself.

As am I, I guess. 

Well what is the evidence ?  I have not seen any.
The only argument Derek had was energy flowing through lamp witch in itself is just a wire (electrical conductor) about 3ns or so after the switch was closed.
And it is not about how close is the battery to the lamp but how close are the wires that form the line capacitance together.
In fact the battery can be moved 10 or 20m away with all the other components in the same place and it will still be about 3ns before some current will flow through the lamp.
Same problem with the switch. If all is the same and the only thing you move is the switch location that will influence the time it takes for a current to start flowing through the lamp even tho the position of the lamp and battery is unchanged.

If the switch is all the way on the moon and the battery and lamp are 1m apart here on earth when switch is closed there will be a current flow through the wire starting on the moon but there will be no current through the lamp until about the time it takes light to travel that distance 95% or of the speed of light.

[electrodacus]

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

What part you disagree with ?

a) electric energy is the electric power integrated over time.
b) electric power is the product of electric potential and electric current.
c) electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space.

The c) is copy paste from wikipedia (first line in a google search).

[hamster_nz]

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

What part you disagree with ?

a) electric energy is the electric power integrated over time.
b) electric power is the product of electric potential and electric current.
c) electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space.

The c) is copy paste from wikipedia (first line in a google search).

You missed out your definition of electrical potential. I'll assume voltage.

You say energy flows in the wire, and I know voltage can be measured with a DMM or voltmeter.

How should I attach both probes to the wire to measure it? Everywhere I try I get a number number very close to zero, indicating zero powre!
 

[electrodacus]

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

What part you disagree with ?

a) electric energy is the electric power integrated over time.
b) electric power is the product of electric potential and electric current.
c) electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space.

The c) is copy paste from wikipedia (first line in a google search).

You missed out your definition of electrical potential. I'll assume voltage.

You say energy flows in the wire, and I know voltage can be measured with a DMM or voltmeter.

How should I attach both probes to the wire to measure it? Everywhere I try I get a number number very close to zero, indicating zero powre!

I think those 3 points are sufficient unless you want to say that one of them is incorrect or you want to say that there are electrons or ions traveling that 1m gap between wires.

[HuronKing]

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

What part you disagree with ?

a) electric energy is the electric power integrated over time.
b) electric power is the product of electric potential and electric current.
c) electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space.

The c) is copy paste from wikipedia (first line in a google search).

You missed out your definition of electrical potential. I'll assume voltage.

You say energy flows in the wire, and I know voltage can be measured with a DMM or voltmeter.

How should I attach both probes to the wire to measure it? Everywhere I try I get a number number very close to zero, indicating zero powre!

I think those 3 points are sufficient unless you want to say that one of them is incorrect or you want to say that there are electrons or ions traveling that 1m gap between wires.

Oh my God. Hahaha. What a blatant refusal to define 'voltage'. 

[electrodacus]

Oh my God. Hahaha. What a blatant refusal to define 'voltage'. 

Do you understand that with zero current there is zero power and thus zero energy ?
Unless you disagree with one of those 3 points electrical energy doesn't travel outside the wires.

[Naej]

Here is my power supply analogy.
One long wire is at 20V (it's the wind), another is at 0V (ground).
Make a device which goes fast, say 10 times faster than electron drift speed.

Mech
P = F * v

Electric
P = V * I

Both cases 200W = 20 * 10

I asked to provide the circuit you will use at the output of the power supply so that any of those values can be higher than the max available.
If you use a resistor divider you can provide me with any voltage output between 0V and 20V but nothing below or above that same as you can get a direct downwind, wind powered vehicle at any speed between 0 and wind speed but not above or below unless you use energy storage.

And I will really love to see how you can get more than 100% power output after that circuit.

Nah I don't think you understand the size of the atmosphere.
So the equivalent problem is: given a capacitor with 1GF (gigafarad), charged at 20V how do you get 200W during 3 minutes, for example  200V-1A.
And of course you can use energy storage, much like Blackbird uses energy storage: moving parts (wheels, propeller, gear), moving car.

[Naej]

That's some pretty lazy flip-flopping between current and energy there, (again)...

What part you disagree with ?

a) electric energy is the electric power integrated over time.
b) electric power is the product of electric potential and electric current.
c) electric current is a stream of charged particles, such as electrons or ions, moving through an electrical conductor or space.

The c) is copy paste from wikipedia (first line in a google search).

You missed out your definition of electrical potential. I'll assume voltage.

You say energy flows in the wire, and I know voltage can be measured with a DMM or voltmeter.

How should I attach both probes to the wire to measure it? Everywhere I try I get a number number very close to zero, indicating zero powre!

Nah you need electric potential.
And you can get a good approximation of a potential difference with a voltmeter.
If you want to know the power you have to multiply by the current. 

[Alex Eisenhut]

Oh my God. Hahaha. What a blatant refusal to define 'voltage'. 

Do you understand that with zero current there is zero power and thus zero energy ?
Unless you disagree with one of those 3 points electrical energy doesn't travel outside the wires.

How do you explain different signal velocities for PCB traces outside and inside the PCB? How can the surrounding material have an effect if electrical energy is only inside the wire?

How does an electrical signal appear at a radio receiver's antenna?

How does electrical energy appear in a solar cell? That's DC from THz.

[gnuarm]

The electrical energy either flows through wires or outside them.

Hard to argue with that.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest electrical energy travels outside the wires.

Wrong.

You are endlessly repeating yourself.

As am I, I guess. 

The difference is, he is a troll and you are the victim.  Or maybe it's more accurate to say, you are part of his support network.  You provide him with sustenance.

He has done this for two threads now.  He debated his way across dozens of pages about the blackbird, faster than wind, sail car.  Now he has done the same thing about electrical current. 

His techniques are:

• Misapply formula
• Misuse an example
• Ignore clear, unambiguous arguments from others.
• Deny facts from other people
• Make up imaginary physics
• Divert from the truth

Did I miss any?  This guy should go into politics!

[electrodacus]

Nah I don't think you understand the size of the atmosphere.
So the equivalent problem is: given a capacitor with 1GF (gigafarad), charged at 20V how do you get 200W during 3 minutes, for example  200V-1A.
And of course you can use energy storage, much like Blackbird uses energy storage: moving parts (wheels, propeller, gear), moving car.

During those 2 or 3 minutes that Blackbird accelerated to 13m/s it required around 7Wh maybe with friction say round to 10Wh
The commercially available 2.7V 3000F capacitors hold about 3Wh so 4 of those in series will be 750F at 10.8V and contain when fully charged 12Wh sufficient to do exactly what Blackbird has done in that speed record test.
The main problem that you ignore is that there wind no wind power available to vehicle when direct downwind at speed equal or higher than wind.
During that period vehicle is accelerated by stored energy.
   

[Alex Eisenhut]

The main problem that you ignore is that there wind no wind power available to vehicle when direct downwind at speed equal or higher than wind.
During that period vehicle is accelerated by stored energy.
   

And what you are ignoring is the wind from the propeller pushing backwards.

Quick! What is 2 - (-2)?

[electrodacus]

Nah you need electric potential.
And you can get a good approximation of a potential difference with a voltmeter.
If you want to know the power you have to multiply by the current. 

You probably did not understand my question.
If you want to claim that energy from battery to load doesn't travel through wire you will need to:
-either say that c) the definition of electrical current everyone agrees with is false.
-or you need to prove that there are electrons traveling outside the wire from the battery directly to the lamp.

Since if there are no electrons fling trough that 1m gap of air then electric current is zero through that gap thus the electric power is zero and electric energy obviously zero.
So to prove your point you will need to disagree with one of those 3 points I made and nothing else is needed.
 
   

[electrodacus]

And what you are ignoring is the wind from the propeller pushing backwards.

Quick! What is 2 - (-2)?

What you call "wind from the propeller" is stored energy in pressure differential.
If you replace air (compressible fluid) with water (non compressible fluid) then there will be no pushing back since your entire power comes from the water current.

Put in the simplest form is this diagram below. So you explain how this vehicle can move from left to right without involving energy storage.
This is the equivalent of direct upwind as you can not have a wheels only equivalent of direct downwind faster than wind.
If pressure differential energy storage was not needed then you could demonstrate a direct downwind version of the vehicle using only wheels on solid surfaces.  Derek even showed a version with wheels in his video claiming to be direct downwind faster than wind equivalent when it was in fact direct upwind and he confused input with output of that vehicle.



and what is 2-(-2) ? meant to mean.
You have wind speed - vehicle speed so you have 2-1 when below wind speed 2-2 when vehicle speed equal wind speed and 2-3 when vehicle sped higher than wind speed.
You only have 2-(-2) for a direct upwind vehicle where the vehicle speed and wind speed will add up this way.

[Naej]

Nah I don't think you understand the size of the atmosphere.
So the equivalent problem is: given a capacitor with 1GF (gigafarad), charged at 20V how do you get 200W during 3 minutes, for example  200V-1A.
And of course you can use energy storage, much like Blackbird uses energy storage: moving parts (wheels, propeller, gear), moving car.

During those 2 or 3 minutes that Blackbird accelerated to 13m/s it required around 7Wh maybe with friction say round to 10Wh
The commercially available 2.7V 3000F capacitors hold about 3Wh so 4 of those in series will be 750F at 10.8V and contain when fully charged 12Wh sufficient to do exactly what Blackbird has done in that speed record test.
The main problem that you ignore is that there wind no wind power available to vehicle when direct downwind at speed equal or higher than wind.
During that period vehicle is accelerated by stored energy.

Nah there's plenty of energy available in wind. You know, 1/2*m*v^2 is rarely equal to 0.

[PlainName]

So you explain how this vehicle can move from left to right without involving energy storage.

You made a video showing it working. You say it's energy storage rather than friction that makes it jerk but, and this is what you are ignoring even though you actually made it happen, the vehicle moved to the right. At no point did it move left. It would keep moving right as long as you pulled the paper, jerking or not.

Your energy storage fetish is just covering up the fact that the model worked as predicted, as you proved.

[electrodacus]

Nah there's plenty of energy available in wind. You know, 1/2*m*v^2 is rarely equal to 0.

You get that the air molecules can no longer hit the vehicle when both the vehicle and air molecules have the same speed in the same direction.
Even your wrong wind power equation agrees with that statement.
But since you think over 100% efficiency is possible and think that you get more propulsion power than braking power at the wheels is hard to have a rational discussion.
Until you recognise that above 100% efficiency is not possible. I'm just wasting my time.

[PlainName]

You get that the air molecules can no longer hit the vehicle when both the vehicle and air molecules have the same speed in the same direction.

You get that the prop thrust is actually moving backwards from the vehicle, so presenting resistance to the wind which is at vehicle speed?

Ah, forgot, no you don't. In your universe the turning prop doesn't produce thrust of any kind in any direction.

[electrodacus]

You made a video showing it working. You say it's energy storage rather than friction that makes it jerk but, and this is what you are ignoring even though you actually made it happen, the vehicle moved to the right. At no point did it move left. It would keep moving right as long as you pulled the paper, jerking or not.

Your energy storage fetish is just covering up the fact that the model worked as predicted, as you proved.

I made the video exactly to show what happens for someone that can understand it.
It is clear both in video and in theory the front wheel (wheel on the right that is generator wheel) moves while the vehicle and back wheel are stationary meaning that energy from the front wheel is being stored.
You have a force and speed at the front wheel so you have power but the power input is not doing any work as it is being stored as elastic potential energy in the belt.
As the belt is stretched more and more storing energy the force at generator wheel with will be mirrored exactly at the motor wheel and at some point this force becomes so large that the wheel will slip allowing in that moment the back wheel to rotate forward powered by the energy stored in the belt and as that stored energy is being used up the acceleration slows down until the wheel sticks again and the cycle repeat.
A smaller energy storage capacity (stiffer belt) means the cycle will need to repeat much faster so fast that it will not be visible without a high speed camera (human brain will see that as continue motion same as 30 still photos in sequence per second look like smooth motion).
If wheel was not allowed to slip or reduce the slip to a level where power delivered by the energy storage can not cancel friction the vehicle will not move or move backwards so from right to left.

You just make the theoretical calculation of that simple system excluding energy storage and you see that vehicle has no chance to move forward unless of course like Naej you think more than 100% efficiency is possible.

[electrodacus]

You get that the prop thrust is actually moving backwards from the vehicle, so presenting resistance to the wind which is at vehicle speed?

Ah, forgot, no you don't. In your universe the turning prop doesn't produce thrust of any kind in any direction.

You forget that the prop is powered by wind power so if wind power is zero prop power is zero.
We are ignoring energy storage that you do not want to acknowledge as if you acknowledge the reality then vehicle is still pulled and push by the stored pressure differential. Witch is what happens in real world with propeller in air (compressible fluid).

To ignore energy storage in pressure differential is to ignore than air (gas) is a compressible fluid.
In a non compressible fluid like water the same vehicle can not exceed water speed unless again you think that efficiency of any system can be above 100% (Overunity).

[Naej]

Nah there's plenty of energy available in wind. You know, 1/2*m*v^2 is rarely equal to 0.

You get that the air molecules can no longer hit the vehicle when both the vehicle and air molecules have the same speed in the same direction.
Even your wrong wind power equation agrees with that statement.
But since you think over 100% efficiency is possible and think that you get more propulsion power than braking power at the wheels is hard to have a rational discussion.
Until you recognise that above 100% efficiency is not possible. I'm just wasting my time.

Do you think a propeller in still air can't work? Lol.
Okay let's wrongly assume there is a problem at this speed. Then when the car goes at twice the wind speed, there's plenty of air for the prop.

Ever heard about heat pumps? They can have 300% efficiency.
If you want to understand why, and how, then you'll have to learn about thermodynamics.

[Naej]

You get that the prop thrust is actually moving backwards from the vehicle, so presenting resistance to the wind which is at vehicle speed?

Ah, forgot, no you don't. In your universe the turning prop doesn't produce thrust of any kind in any direction.

You forget that the prop is powered by wind power so if wind power is zero prop power is zero.

The prop is geared to the wheels. If the wheels turn, the prop turns.
And if the prop turns, the kinetic energy of the wind behind the car is reduced, which means you get energy to the car. Very simple.