"Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ?

[aetherist]

[...]
One problem with speed is that all metals have corrosion which must slow the electons (i mean the oxide, not the roughness). But if the threaded bar & plain bar are the same material then that might not be a big worry.
[...]

Not all metals corrode at the same rate so some may even remain mostly oxide free for the duration of a test, a reasonably well controlled layer of oxide could even be incrimentally grown onto a test rod. Differrent oxides would have different properties, iron oxide is renowned for making things go slowly, so obviously thats the first candidate. Green copper oxide is a pretty fast colour, though not as fast as chrome oxide. Nickel is a wildcard.

Finally, I think I'm understanding this theory.

Seriously, there are Nobels waiting here. A 2 page paper getting a Nobel. We would share the money. And SandyCox would be happy to nominate us.

[HuronKing]

Yes i steer clear from any quantum stuff. Hence i dont understand it. However i think that it uses aether. I am ok with models that give good numbers. But i cant argue re Q stuff. Does it use any kind of relativity? Does it use E=mcc?

You... you don't know anything about 'quantum stuff' and yet you want to sit there and write gobbledeegook about photons and electrons? Have you never heard of the Dirac Equation until just now?!?!

Yes... yes quantum physics does use E = mc^2... that's the basis of nuclear fission/fusion. For such a self-proclaimed genius I am astounded at your apparently profound ignorance of something high school students learn.

How anyone is taking your crankery seriously is more remarkable than anything else in this thread to date.

But Einsteinian stuff in the modern super accurate era, & computer era, is failing.
I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it. They would invent some kind of excuse. In fact they are so clever that they would have no trouble finding a way to use that excuse  to once again prove Einstein. Why defend when u can attack. Oh, wait, if forgot, they could score 3 home runs with the one hit, they could throw in a Nobel nomination. Whether they were awarded the Nobel would be another matter, i mean there are so many faux-discoveries out there, its like having umpteen gangs trying to rob the same bank on the same day.

And like all cranks - your ultimate bastion is to accuse numerous independent international laboratories of a century long conspiracy. 

STR is krapp -- & GTR is mostly krapp.
We are presently in the Einsteinian Dark Age of science -- but the times they are a-changin'.
The aether will return -- it never left.

 

[TimFox]

By the way, the behavior of conduction electrons in a solid metal wire is governed by quantum mechanics.
A long time ago (1928), Dirac expanded quantum mechanics to include special relativistic conditions:  see the "Dirac equation", which is the relativistic form of the original Schrödinger equation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation
One of my former co-workers, for purely political reasons, did not "believe in" biological evolution or quantum mechanics.  I told him he would have to stop using solid-state electronics, which depends on quantum mechanics to explain its operation.

[aetherist]

By the way, the behavior of conduction electrons in a solid metal wire is governed by quantum mechanics.
A long time ago (1928), Dirac expanded quantum mechanics to include special relativistic conditions:  see the "Dirac equation", which is the relativistic form of the original Schrödinger equation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation
One of my former co-workers, for purely political reasons, did not "believe in" biological evolution or quantum mechanics.  I told him he would have to stop using solid-state electronics, which depends on quantum mechanics to explain its operation.

So, Dirac reckoned that electricity in a wire was explained by the Jellium sea of electrons in matter.
And he reckoned that aether in vacuum was explained by a sea of electrons in the vacuum.
I think i will stick with my aether, & my electons.

Having a model to give numbers is not the same thing as having a model to show reality. Your friend is allowed to say that he does not believe in QM, as a reality thing, while believing that it gives good numbers.
And u are using silly logic when u say that QM explains the operation of solid-state electronics. The operation of something is a real thing, it aint just the using of math-equations for pseudo-waves to give quasi-numbers for faux-reality.

[TimFox]

This reminds me of the Catholic Church's rejection of Copernican astronomy (later, of course, improved by Galileo and Kepler) because they did not want to believe in a non-geocentric Solar System.
However, Copernicus' De revolutionibus orbium coelestium was allowed in Jesuit libraries because it gave better numbers than Ptolemy's Almagest.
The "operation of something" is measured and described by numbers, not hypothetical angels dancing on the head of a pin.  This is the purpose of experimental proof.

[aetherist]

Yes i steer clear from any quantum stuff. Hence i dont understand it. However i think that it uses aether. I am ok with models that give good numbers. But i cant argue re Q stuff. Does it use any kind of relativity? Does it use E=mcc?

You... you don't know anything about 'quantum stuff' and yet you want to sit there and write gobbledeegook about photons and electrons? Have you never heard of the Dirac Equation until just now?!?!

Aha, that’s where i have gone wrong, i have invoked photons (electrons are photons), when i should have invoked an equation. Equations are the fundamental essence. And the fundamental elementary particle. I bet that Dirac wiped his bum with equations. While kissing his Nobel medallion.

Yes... yes quantum physics does use E = mc^2... that's the basis of nuclear fission/fusion. For such a self-proclaimed genius I am astounded at your apparently profound ignorance of something high school students learn.

E=mcc has never been proven, ie the correct equation might be E=mcc/2. We don’t know.
And E=mcc  has never been needed to build a fission bomb.

But Einsteinian stuff in the modern super accurate era, & computer era, is failing.
I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it. They would invent some kind of excuse. In fact they are so clever that they would have no trouble finding a way to use that excuse  to once again prove Einstein. Why defend when u can attack. Oh, wait, if forgot, they could score 3 home runs with the one hit, they could throw in a Nobel nomination. Whether they were awarded the Nobel would be another matter, i mean there are so many faux-discoveries out there, its like having umpteen gangs trying to rob the same bank on the same day.

And like all cranks - your ultimate bastion is to accuse numerous independent international laboratories of a century long conspiracy. 

STR is krapp -- & GTR is mostly krapp.
We are presently in the Einsteinian Dark Age of science -- but the times they are a-changin'.
The aether will return -- it never left.

Yes, but i don’t know about a century long, LIGO has been going for only say 30 years. The CMBR krapp for say 35 years.

[aetherist]

This reminds me of the Catholic Church's rejection of Copernican astronomy (later, of course, improved by Galileo and Kepler) because they did not want to believe in a non-geocentric Solar System.
However, Copernicus' De revolutionibus orbium coelestium was allowed in Jesuit libraries because it gave better numbers than Ptolemy's Almagest.
The "operation of something" is measured and described by numbers, not hypothetical angels dancing on the head of a pin.  This is the purpose of experimental proof.

Most proofs (so called) need numbers & units.
And my electons will be confirmed by numbers & units.

Angels dancing on the head of a pin can of course be proven with numbers & units.
CERN could do it. LIGO could do it. WMAP could do it. And they would get another Nobel for it.
Dirac might have had an equation for it. After all an Angel is merely a wave function. And we have virtual Angels popping in & out of existence.  Feynman had an Angel diagram for that.
But what is the rest mass for an Angel? Is a dancing Angel truly at rest?
Dirac could predict anti-Angels. Not hypothetical anti-Angels, i mean real anti-Angels, ie with their own wave-equations, u cant get more real than that.

[TimFox]

The fundamental experimental evidence for the equivalence of rest mass and energy commonly written in an equation (without hand waving) E = mc² can be found in comparing the masses of the nuclei before and after a fission reaction, where the difference goes into the energy release.  The measurements are not off by a factor of 2. 
see  https://www.dummies.com/article/academics-the-arts/science/physics/nuclear-fission-basics-200956
Careful measurements of atomic mass predate experimental fission.  See "History" section of
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Atomic_mass

[daqq]

I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it.

FFS  So anything that doesn't support your claims is yet more clear and undeniable proof that the whole scientific world conspiring against your claims in a diabolical effort to suppress them. Good to know.

Why defend when u can attack.

Says the guy who's been shitting on Einstein for most of the thread.

[HuronKing]

E=mcc has never been proven, ie the correct equation might be E=mcc/2. We don’t know.
And E=mcc  has never been needed to build a fission bomb.

Once again demonstrating your total and absolute ignorance of any of the stuff you're babbling about.

First, E = mc^2 has been experimentally demonstrated in Pair Production in particle accelerators. And it's a pretty routine calculation in nuclear energy plant output (how much fuel is required to produce energy).

Second, you are, again, totally ignorant of the history of fission:
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3693
https://www.ans.org/news/article-938/lise-meitners-fantastic-explanation-nuclear-fission/

Yes, but i don’t know about a century long, LIGO has been going for only say 30 years. The CMBR krapp for say 35 years.

I can't keep up with your insane conspiracies and whether you think the 'Einsteinian dark age' began in 1905, 1930, 1950, or 1980 or whatever.

Whatever you think, you're consistently demonstrating utter unfamiliarity with even basic tenets of the physics at play here.

The fact that you think relativity and quantum mechanics are separate disciplines with no relation to one another is another egregious misstep so far.

[TimFox]

I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it.

FFS  So anything that doesn't support your claims is yet more clear and undeniable proof that the whole scientific world conspiring against your claims in a diabolical effort to suppress them. Good to know.

Why defend when u can attack.

Says the guy who's been shitting on Einstein for most of the thread.

Scatology rarely improves an argument.

[aetherist]

The fundamental experimental evidence for the equivalence of rest mass and energy commonly written in an equation (without hand waving) E = mc² can be found in comparing the masses of the nuclei before and after a fission reaction, where the difference goes into the energy release.  The measurements are not off by a factor of 2. 
see  https://www.dummies.com/article/academics-the-arts/science/physics/nuclear-fission-basics-200956
Careful measurements of atomic mass predate experimental fission.  See "History" section of
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Atomic_mass

I am not allergic to E=mcc. I am allergic to the Einstein derivation.
But if tests lean towards E=mcc rather than E=mcc/2 then i am happy with that. There is a slight chance of having a circular argument on both sides of the equation, but i can accept that that can be ruled out with good tests. But the Einstein derivation is a circular argument, as shown by Ives.

The real problem is of course that no-one knows what E=mcc really means. Einstein changed his mind on this as the years went by, as of course u will be aware. But skoolkids are still taught that mass increases with speed.

[aetherist]

I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it.

FFS  So anything that doesn't support your claims is yet more clear and undeniable proof that the whole scientific world conspiring against your claims in a diabolical effort to suppress them. Good to know.

Why defend when u can attack.

Says the guy who's been shitting on Einstein for most of the thread.

Einstein shit on aetherwind. It all comes back to the aetherwind, the suppression of aetherwind. Shankland was Einstein's hitman here, in 1955 (a few months before Einstein died).
In the modern era we have hitman No2, Roberts (in about 2002). Others pointed out where Shankland was wrong. And it was me myself that pointed out where Roberts was wrong.
The aether will return, it never left.

[aetherist]

E=mcc has never been proven, ie the correct equation might be E=mcc/2. We don’t know.
And E=mcc  has never been needed to build a fission bomb.

Once again demonstrating your total and absolute ignorance of any of the stuff you're babbling about.

First, E = mc^2 has been experimentally demonstrated in Pair Production in particle accelerators. And it's a pretty routine calculation in nuclear energy plant output (how much fuel is required to produce energy).

Second, you are, again, totally ignorant of the history of fission:
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3693
https://www.ans.org/news/article-938/lise-meitners-fantastic-explanation-nuclear-fission/

Yes, but i don’t know about a century long, LIGO has been going for only say 30 years. The CMBR krapp for say 35 years.

I can't keep up with your insane conspiracies and whether you think the 'Einsteinian dark age' began in 1905, 1930, 1950, or 1980 or whatever.

Whatever you think, you're consistently demonstrating utter unfamiliarity with even basic tenets of the physics at play here.

The fact that you think relativity and quantum mechanics are separate disciplines with no relation to one another is another egregious misstep so far.

QM uses spacetime. Enough said.

The Dark Age of Science i think began with Einstein's STR. It got worse year by year, eg he got a Nobel in 1928 or something. Although it didn’t really begin until after he died, ie when experiments & measurements became much more accurate. And the Dark Age of Science will die when experiments & measurements get super accurate.

[HuronKing]

QM uses spacetime. Enough said.

Ahh. This explains why you admit your cluelessness about QM. You should leave photons and electrons alone though... basically all of electricity.

The Dark Age of Science i think began with Einstein's STR. It got worse year by year, eg he got a Nobel in 1928 or something. Although it didn’t really begin until after he died, ie when experiments & measurements became much more accurate. And the Dark Age of Science will die when experiments & measurements get super accurate.

Please... stop... I can't take this level of comedy. 

[TimFox]

The establishment still scoffed at relativity in 1921, so the 1922 prize awarded to Einstein was for his explanation of the photoelectric effect. 
This effect was one of the famous experimental results that could not be explained by classical physics.
His explanation involved photons, electrons, and equations.  The equations still explain the quantitative aspects of the photoelectric effect.
The history of science is interesting, but should not be confused with the body of physical theory now in use.  During the inter-war period, there was a lot of controversy and polite (usually) discussion between the leading natural philosophers of the day, involving both actual experimental evidence and thought-experiments.  Einstein's point of view was opposed to probabilistic explanations ("God does not play dice").  Usually, the adult in the room during these arguments was Neils Bohr.  (Bohr's original explanation of atomic energy levels motivated further theoretical development by Heisenberg, Schroedinger, and others, and is no longer used in its original form.)  Thus, science progresses.
I am not very religious, but I share Einstein's credo:  "Raffiniert ist der Herr Gott, aber boshaft ist er nicht."

[aetherist]

The establishment still scoffed at relativity in 1921, so the 1922 prize awarded to Einstein was for his explanation of the photoelectric effect. 
This effect was one of the famous experimental results that could not be explained by classical physics.
His explanation involved photons, electrons, and equations.  The equations still explain the quantitative aspects of the photoelectric effect.
The history of science is interesting, but should not be confused with the body of physical theory now in use.  During the inter-war period, there was a lot of controversy and polite (usually) discussion between the leading natural philosophers of the day, involving both actual experimental evidence and thought-experiments.  Einstein's point of view was opposed to probabilistic explanations ("God does not play dice").  Usually, the adult in the room during these arguments was Neils Bohr.  (Bohr's original explanation of atomic energy levels motivated further theoretical development by Heisenberg, Schroedinger, and others, and is no longer used in its original form.)  Thus, science progresses.
I am not very religious, but I share Einstein's credo:  "Raffiniert ist der Herr Gott, aber boshaft ist er nicht."

More likely Lenard's explanation. Stolen by Mrs Einstein. And the equations here too were probably hers not his.
And i suspect that a proper explanation might involve my electons, i will have to have a good think.

[aetherist]

QM uses spacetime. Enough said.

Ahh. This explains why you admit your cluelessness about QM. You should leave photons and electrons alone though... basically all of electricity.

The Dark Age of Science i think began with Einstein's STR. It got worse year by year, eg he got a Nobel in 1928 or something. Although it didn’t really begin until after he died, ie when experiments & measurements became much more accurate. And the Dark Age of Science will die when experiments & measurements get super accurate.

Please... stop... I can't take this level of comedy. 

I think i am starting to see. So, free photons & electrons are QM wave-functions, & electricity involves a jellium sea of wave-functions that drift along in a wire.
What does QM say about magnetism around a current in a wire? I mean re explaining what magnetism is, not how big it is.
How would QM explain my electon?

Anyhow, who was it that said that anyone who said that they understood QM didnt really understand it? Was it Born or Bohr?

[rfclown]

... I discovered electons, & i explained electricity in/on a wire. ...

Wow. This reminds me of a book I read (part of) years ago when I was spending time in a Barnes & Noble many years ago: There Are No Electrons: Electronics for Earthlings, by Kenn Amdahl. I think I'm going to order it and give it a re-read.

[eugene]

I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it. They would invent some kind of excuse. In fact they are so clever that they would have no trouble finding a way to use that excuse  to once again prove Einstein.

This has got to be my favorite flavor of conspiracy theory: that a bunch of scientists all agree to the same lie. Obviously, you don't know any scientists. All they want to do is be the first to find something new. (Just like you, except you're not a scientist.) There's no way you could keep each of them from secretly publishing their own paper and getting all of the glory. The premise is laughable.

[Sredni]

This thread has gone so far south that it fell off the border of flat earth.

[SandyCox]

The theory of "new electric" has already been discovered:

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

[aetherist]

I am not sure how aetherwind might affect CERN. If they did observe aetherwind they would of course never report it. They would invent some kind of excuse. In fact they are so clever that they would have no trouble finding a way to use that excuse  to once again prove Einstein.

This has got to be my favorite flavor of conspiracy theory: that a bunch of scientists all agree to the same lie. Obviously, you don't know any scientists. All they want to do is be the first to find something new. (Just like you, except you're not a scientist.) There's no way you could keep each of them from secretly publishing their own paper and getting all of the glory. The premise is laughable.

According to Einsteinists (such as the scientists getting paid every second Thursday at CERN) we can destroy the earth if a grain of sand gets close enuff to the speed of light, because a grain of sand would then have almost infinite energy. For example 0.999 999 999 999 999 999 999 999 999c might destroy the Earth, according to them, & according to young Alby. Ridiculous.

However, aether theory (& old Albert) says that there is no such thing as mass increase with speed.

So, aetherists agree with old Albert, who (in later years) said that the max possible mass was the rest mass, & that speed did not add mass. But i notice that many Einsteinists disagree with old Albert, they like young Alby.

Aether theory says that relative velocity can be almost 2c (ie we can go at almost 1c in opposite directions). Aetherists say that the energy of a grain of sand is E=mVV/2. And, V can be almost 2c. So, E can be 2mcc. Which would have a smallish finite value (not a nearly infinite value).
A 2.1 mm grain of sand weighing 13 mg, with a relative speed of 2c, would have a KE of 2.34*10^12 J.
This is equivalent to 1 kg moving at c/139. Earth is safe(ish), at least today. Thanx to aetherists (no thanx to CERN).

It is equivalent to 28 atomic bombs (ea being 20,000 tonnes of TNT).

[aetherist]

This thread has gone so far south that it fell off the border of flat earth.

Physicists sometimes mention pure energy.  What is pure energy?

Anyhow, i reckon that mass cant be completely converted to (pure) energy. In that case,  E=mcc aint true. 

Mass is bottled light (Jeans), ie confined photons (Williamson), & annihilation of say an electron (a confined photon) produces a free photon (or two), & free photons have mass & energy.

Free neutrinos are paired photons (if u were wondering)(not important).  Confined neutrinos are dark matter (u should have been wondering)(not important).

Anyhow, mass cant be completely destroyed, all of the confined photons can only be converted to free photons, & free photons cant be destroyed, & free photons have energy.
Hence   E=mcc aint valid.

STR is krapp -- & GTR is mostly krapp.
We are presently in the Einsteinian Dark Age of science -- but the times they are a-changin'.
The aether will return -- it never left.

[aetherist]

... I discovered electons, & i explained electricity in/on a wire. ...

Wow. This reminds me of a book I read (part of) years ago when I was spending time in a Barnes & Noble many years ago: There Are No Electrons: Electronics for Earthlings, by Kenn Amdahl. I think I'm going to order it and give it a re-read.

https://www.facebook.com/There-Are-No-Electrons-Electronics-for-Earthlings-by-Kenn-Amdahl-112434572156821/
https://geekmom.com/2011/02/kenn-amdahl-makes-learning-fun/?fbclid=IwAR3LocbyR23NEJT9tuMkKlOELGe88JGkiRNfUrnRvxYaNP6OC2UqK7C407E
In an effort to write an engaging book on a dull (to some) subject, Kenn Amdahl brings us There Are No Electrons: Electronics for Earthlings. Praised by the likes of Ray Bradbury, Clive Cussler, and Dave Barry, this book aims to teach electricity to those that don’t take to it naturally.
With a really humorous tack, Amdahl teaches aspects of electromagnetism with humor and narrative. This isn’t a book that just systematically teaches you how electricity works. It takes you on a journey, including you as part of a story line. The learning will come easily. This book very much reminds me of the English book Grammarland which we use in our homeschooling. That 100+ year old text for kids teaches grammar in the context of a story. It is much more entertaining than any other way I’ve seen grammar taught, and Amdahl does the same for electronics here.
Filled with examples, stories, a handful of equations and diagrams, plenty of tongue-in-cheek, and even some poetry, There Are No Electrons: Electronics For Earthlings makes a dry subject easier to read. Many concepts are addressed, and specific electronic parts (diodes, capacitors, transistors, semiconductors, oscillators, etc.) are explained.
You may not know or remember all of the equations dealing with electricity, but by the time you’re done reading this book, you’ll understand the basics. And for most of us, that’s enough.
There Are No Electrons: Electronics For Earthlings retails for $12.95.
Image: Clearwater Publishing
If you are the (rare?) kind of geek who isn’t enthralled with math for math’s sake (I assume there are some of you out there), Kenn Amdahl has also written two math books with Jim Loats, Ph.D

http://www.clearwaterpublishing.com/there-are-no-electrons-electronics-for-earthling/?fbclid=IwAR1Rol7D9SHk75QrKnLFGkk4TEuBmbp42zA-WdGbCQSyIyTmhLcXZ7Ql6GE
There Are No Electrons: Electronics for Earthlings  by Kenn Amdahl