/sci/ - Science & Math

oh my god are you in elementary school?

>>10259109
Electrons ARE moving, but very slowly, and not very far until they hit ions in the metal and stop
However, the electron moving makes other nearby electrons move and this happens much faster
Read on Drude's model

>>10259136
Explain it then faggot, or do you only know the super abstracted version that is commonly used?

Think of it as an instantaneously transmitted vibration, like a plucked string; but endless.

>>10259109
>>10259161

>>10259147
Sweet, thanks I’ll check it out. I am familiar with the fact that they actually moving very very slowly... where I am not clear is where does the energy transfer occur, since it does not lie solely in the very slow movement of free electrons moving to the other side of the line

>>10259161
>image of goofy pseudoscience where some retard found out about geometric series and thought he found God
Yeah I’ll need some proof with that

>>10259170
>implying you understand the significance of 3, 6, and 9 or how it relates to "electron" orbital vibration, AKA resonance fields.

electrons are wacky, few things in consideration bout them is:

electrons arent exactly matter but arent entirely energy particles either. Fleming's Left hand rule states that electrical energy is kinetic motion of electrons on a magnetic fields flow lines of force. the energy in question is the kinetic motion transfer of electrons not the particles themselves.

on physical electron loss this isnt very measurable at all, despite the name an electron microscope cant actually image an electron, instead it images atomic structure of protons and nutrons. in order to image an electron you would need a micriscope with 10^38 higher magnification than an electron microscope cuz they are that small

and you would need to warp the light physics to be able to record an image faster than the speed of light. due to refraction needed this is not possible (basically the microscope captures light or energy bouncing off what you're looking at, cuz electrons move at roughly speed of light even if ur microscope could see them it would be a reflection artifact of where it once was and not the actual electron itself.)

so the observer effect basically nullifies most data you could possibly collect to begin with.

but that aside, electronic energy isnt like a particle accelerator where one single electron traverses from power supply to load using the electricity

instead its more like a domino chain where one electron transfers its energy to the next and so on like a newtons cradle. least thats the thoery anyway we still actually cant prove it.

>>10259194
on them popping in and out of existence or being 2 places at once, this is mostly artifacts of electrons^ moving faster than the speed of light thru use of quantum elevators.

they dont just blink in an out or exist multiple places, they just appear to us to do that behavior because of how light physics works to the degree that we cant track or see anything moving faster than the speed of light, and anything that did mive faster than speed of light leaves behind an image artifact of where it once was which is indistinguishable from the physical particle itself

>>10259194
>electrons aren't exactly matter
Yes they are exactly matter. If it has mass, it's matter.

>>10259196
>faster than light speed
No.

Read a physics book some time.

>>10259194
>instead its more like a domino chain where one electron transfers its energy to the next and so on like a newtons cradle. least thats the thoery anyway we still actually cant prove it.
This is the best explanation I’ve found so far. If anyone has any more to add on this please dump any links or formulas that describes this physical energy transfer

basically this

>>10259109

It's valence electrons bumping one another from atom to atom.

>>10259194
>instead its more like a domino chain where one electron transfers its energy to the next and so on like a newtons cradle. least thats the thoery anyway we still actually cant prove it.

What is the nature of the energy being transferred, it can't be purely kinetic - can it? Yes, I know it's only an analogy, and analogies can only be taken so far before they break down. Could it be sort of like what happens when tuning forks start resonating with their neighbours? (more or less the same thing but different transfer mechanism than that implied by the bumping particle model, I guess)

And/or what makes electrons such good resonators, or gives them this ability to transfer energy to their neighbours so effectively?

>>10259803
it's electric energy, you can also call it electric charge

>>10259109
http://milesmathis.com/seft.pdf

>>10260493
Very interesting read

>>10260493
Nicely corroborates these posts in a more detailed way
>>10259161
>>10259162
>>10259189
Even mentions Tesla by name three times! Good summary.