Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Mitko Gorgiev on 27/11/2019 09:46:05
-
No, it cannot be arbitrary at all..
(in this answer I will use the words “plus” and “minus” instead of “positive” and “negative”)
“Plus” is the effect towards outside (expansion, blowing, explosion, yang), “minus” is the effect towards inside (reduction, suctioning, implosion, yin). For example, the act of inhaling is plus, because our chest expands; the act of exhaling is minus, because it reduces in size.
From the history of electromagnetism it is known that Benjamin Franklin (1705-1790) is the man who was the first to introduce the terms “positive” and “negative”, i.e. “plus/minus” in the field of electricity in the middle of the 18th century. Previously, the different types of electricity had been called “vitreous” (meaning “glass”) and “resinous” (meaning “amber”), since the glass and the amber were the most often rubbed objects to produce the opposite electricities. At the time when Franklin gave his contribution, people had actually spoken of two types of electric fluids; however, Franklin argued that there is only one electric fluid, and the excess and the shortage of it in the objects he called “plus” and “minus”. He said that bodies in normal condition have medium amounts of this fluid and are therefore neutral. When two objects are rubbed against each other, one allegedly transfers a part of its fluid to the other and thus the first becomes minus-, and the second object plus-electrified.
It remains a mystery how this type of thinking resulted in the glass electricity being called “plus”, and the amber electricity “minus”, although it has been recorded that Franklin is the man who assigned the plus to the glass, and the minus to the amber electricity.
That these things (i.e. plus and minus in the electricity and in the magnetism) are not arbitrary, I have a proof which I call an ultimate proof. A proof is ultimate when we perceive the truth immediately (directly, unmediated) with our senses, in this case, with our eyes.
If we rotate the discs of a Wimshurst machine by turning the crank manually to the right in a dark room (the most noticeable results can be seen at night in a room with a little exterior street light entering it), and if we do this for at least 10-15 seconds to let the eyes get used to the feeble light, we will notice that the horizontal quadrants emit a light flicker, whereas the vertical are completely dark. On turning the crank to the left the flicker relocates to the vertical quadrants, whereas the horizontal ones now remain dark. Looking even more attentively at the scene, we will notice an essential qualitative difference between what happens in the left and the right quadrant (i.e. the upper and the lower one when the crank is turned to the left). The flicker in one horizontal quadrant is directed from the metal sectors outwards, in the other one inwards. In other words, in the left quadrant the metal sectors are dark and the flickering light glows around them, but in the right quadrant the metal sectors are illuminated and around them it is dark.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
The metallic sectors in the image are drawn as a whole, and not individually, because the light phenomenon appears as a whole; more precisely, as two wholes, one left and one right, and not individually in the sectors.
The electricity of the left quadrant (picture on the left) is the same as the vitreous electricity; the electricity of the right quadrant is the same as the resinous electricity. I will not explain how this is determined, because this answer will become much longer (you can check it out on the given website). So, if Benjamin Franklin has determined what is positive and negative about electricity, he did it right.
If we fill the middle of a ring magnet (taken out of a small loudspeaker) with iron filings, then we tap the magnet to allow the iron powder to freely take its shape, a difference between the one and the other side becomes clearly visible. At the pole which points North a form of blowing is evident (as if we put the lips forward), and at the pole that points South a form of suction (as if we put the lips inwards). Hence, the plus-pole with an effect outwards is the magnetic South pole of the Earth, and the minus-pole with an effect inwards is the magnetic North pole of the Earth.
The electric current flows de jure (conventional current) and de facto (factual current) from the plus- to the minus-pole of the battery through the outer connecting path.
This is an experiment I came across recently in the book Physik, Band 2 from the author Hermann von Baravalle (pages 83–84). Look at the setup below.
When high DC voltage is connected to it, then sparks start to jump across the upper part of the circuit.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
As soon as the poles of the voltage source are reversed, then sparks start to jump across the lower part of the circuit (drawing below).
[ Invalid Attachment ]
The two different ends where the sparks jump are a thick sharpened wire and a metal plate.
In this experiment we see that the sparks appear only in the branch where the Plus is connected to the sharpened metal wire, while the Minus to the metal plate. Since the Plus means blowing, the Minus means suctioning, it is much easier for the electricity to bridge this gap and not the other, because very high pressure is created at the sharpened point. We all know that the water-jet which comes out of a pipe (+) will reach farther if we narrow the pipe. This comparison is valuable for understanding of what happens. At the same time, the suctioning is greater if the suction area is bigger. (see also my answer to the question "What is the Bernoulli Principle?" https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=17067)
-
I am sorry to contradict this. There may be logical reasons why the choice was made in the first place but the choice is an arbitrary one.
-
OK, the first thing to point out is that this has nothing to do with the Bernoulli effect.
The current in the wire is carried by electrons. They flow from the negative pole of the battery to the positive one.
Much of the current in an electric arc is carried by positive ions.
Those flow from the positive electrode (of the spark gap) to the negative one.
So the current flow, in the same circuit, flows in both directions.
It is hard to see a clearer indication than that of the fact that direction of the current- which flows both clockwise, and anticlockwise in the same circuit- is arbitrary.
-
We all know that the water-jet which comes out of a pipe (+) will reach farther if we narrow the pipe
Have you made the mistake of thinking that there is a relation between the fact that electric sparks pass more readily between pointed electrodes and the fact that water travels further from a smaller nozzle?
The real reasons are different.
-
Since the Plus means blowing
That particular logical fallacy is called "begging the question".
-
The designation of positive and negative is entirely arbitrary. Positive charge is defined as the charge left on a glass rod after being rubbed with silk.
-
The reason behind which pole we called positive and which is negative was that it was a random choice made by Benjamin Franklin. He assumed the electricity involved the movement of something from an excess(+) to a deficit(-), but had no way of knowing which direction this was. So he just took a guess. It wasn't until this convention had been long established that the current carrier was learned to be the electron and they flowed from - to +. "conventional current" still treats current as flowing from positive to negative, even though this is opposite to the actual electron flow. The schematic symbols of components like transistors and diodes are based on conventional current. ( the arrows are supposed to point in the direction of current flow).
-
“Plus” is the effect towards outside (expansion, blowing, explosion, yang), “minus” is the effect towards inside (reduction, suctioning, implosion, yin).
Anyone who includes "Yin and "Yang" in their science is going to get laughed at.
-
That these things (i.e. plus and minus in the electricity and in the magnetism) are not arbitrary, I have a proof which I call an ultimate proof. A proof is ultimate when we perceive the truth immediately (directly, unmediated) with our senses, in this case, with our eyes.
If you only believe things that you can see (rather than accepting logic)
Try this
-
That these things (i.e. plus and minus in the electricity and in the magnetism) are not arbitrary, I have a proof which I call an ultimate proof. A proof is ultimate when we perceive the truth immediately (directly, unmediated) with our senses, in this case, with our eyes.
If you only believe things that you can see (rather than accepting logic)
Try this
So, instead of insulting me, you have at last begun to speak with experiments. I will post soon an answer to this and to all others.
-
If people tell the truth and you consider it an insult, that’s your problem
-
If people tell the truth and you consider it an insult, that’s your problem
As I see you are GOD and you know the truth.
Here is another argument that there is an intrinsic difference between the plus and the minus electrification.
-
Here is another argument that there is an intrinsic difference between the plus and the minus electrification.
Nobody said there wasn't a difference.
-
I have finally found an evidence that also Franklin didn't assign the positive sign to the vitreous and the negative sign to the resinous electricity completely by chance. Here is a quotation from the book
"THEORIES OF AETHER AND ELECTRICITY - FROM THE AGE OF DESCARTES TO THE CLOSE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY" from E.T.Whittaker (1910)
"Some curiosity will naturally be felt as to the considerations which induced Franklin to attribute the positive character to vitreous rather than to resinous electricity. They seem to have been founded on a comparison of the brush discharges from conductors charged with the two electricities; when the electricity was resinous, the discharge was observed to spread over the surface of the opposite conductor "as if it flowed from it." Again, if a Leyden jar whose inner coating is electrified vitreously is discharged silently by a conductor, of whose pointed ends one is near the knob and the other near the outer coating, the point which is near the knob is seen in the dark to be illuminated with a star or globule, while the point which is near the outer coating is illuminated with a pencil of rays; which suggested to Franklin that the electric fluid, going from the inside to the outside of the jar, enters at the former point and issues from the latter. And yet again, in some cases the flame of a wax taper is blown away from a brass ball which is discharging vitreous electricity, and towards one which is discharging resinous electricity. But Franklin remarks that the interpretation of these observations is somewhat conjectural, and that whether vitreous or resinous electricity is the actual electric fluid is not certainly known." (pages 44-45)
The bolding of the text comes from me.
-
We know that, in gas discharges, most of the current is carried by positive ions.
But the current in the metl parts is carried by negatively charged electrons.
As I said
So the current flow, in the same circuit, flows in both directions.
It is hard to see a clearer indication than that of the fact that direction of the current- which flows both clockwise, and anticlockwise in the same circuit- is arbitrary.
-
We know that, in gas discharges, most of the current is carried by positive ions.
But the current in the metl parts is carried by negatively charged electrons.
As I said
So the current flow, in the same circuit, flows in both directions.
It is hard to see a clearer indication than that of the fact that direction of the current- which flows both clockwise, and anticlockwise in the same circuit- is arbitrary.
The fact that electric flow in gas discharge is easier to observe than electric flow in metal makes Ben Franklin's decision to assign positive and negative signs for the electric charges feels more natural.