[Bored chemist]

Are you deliberately ignoring the fact that an electrical discharge through air is largely carried by positive ions and that this is the opposite to the dominant charge carrier in metals- where the current is carried by electrons?

What are the experimental evidence that "an electrical discharge through air is largely carried by positive ions" and that the electric current through metals is carried by negative electrons?

Well, for a start, we have spectroscopic data on the ions (among other things, we do mass spectroscopy on them) and hall effect data on the charge carriers in metals.

On the other hand, you have precisely zero evidence.

The plus as well as the minus-potential (/pressure) are not the same along their lines and this may also affect the result.

LOL
do the calculations of voltage drops. That's a very small straw you are clutching at.

[simplex]

If an an electrical discharge through the air is largely carried by positive ions then, I guess, a current of air (wind blowing) should be detected between the electrodes.

[Bored chemist]

If an an electrical discharge through the air is largely carried by positive ions then, I guess, a current of air (wind blowing) should be detected between the electrodes.

A good point.
And, you can in fact detect such a wind.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_wind

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

If an electrical discharge through the air is largely carried by positive ions then, I guess, a current of air (wind blowing) should be detected between the electrodes.

Quotation from "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.

As I found in the dictionary, a "wax taper" means a candle. So, the discharging vitreous (actually Plus) electricity blows the flame of the candle away from the discharging object, while the discharging resinous (actually Minus) electricity blows the flame of the candle towards the discharging object.
If Franklin has said that it is somewhat conjectural, it can only mean that he was not completely sure and perhaps wanted even more experimental evidence for his conclusion.
Here is another evidence that the electricity flows de facto from the Plus to the Minus pole of the battery. When a carbon arc lamp is connected to a DC source, the positive carbon electrode dissipates, while the negative electrode remains pretty intact. When this lamp was used in the 19th century as a street lamp, they had to move the positive electrode closer from time to time, since the positive electrode's dissipation had as a result increased distance between the electrodes and the lamp stopped to shine (with the increased distance the applied voltage was not enough).
This is approximately the form of the carbon electrodes before and after some time of use:

carbon arc lamp.png (1.9 kB . 336x173 - viewed 4968 times)

There are even more experimental evidence here:
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78171.msg587977#msg587977

[Bored chemist]

"THEORIES OF AETHER AND ELECTRICITY - FROM THE AGE OF DESCARTES TO THE CLOSE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY  before we knew anything much about it"

Is there some reason why you don't understand that electrical currents in air are carried largely by positive ions but in metals and CRTs they are carried by electrons?

[hamdani yusuf]

I found an experiment video on youtube, and I think it's relevant to put here.
(+) vs (-) Underwater Lightning- is there a difference?

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

I found an experiment video on youtube, and I think it's relevant to put here.
(+) vs (-) Underwater Lightning- is there a difference?

Yes, it is very relevant and I thank you for this video.
This is one more evidence that the Plus-electricity has a property of blowing, whereas the Minus-electricity a property of suctioning.
As one can see from the video, when the plus-end of the cable is immersed in the water, then the lightning is outside the cable (as pictured in my figure (a) below).
When the minus-end of the cable is immersed in the water, then the lightning is inside the cable (figure (b)).

Lightning in water.png (6.24 kB . 276x368 - viewed 2879 times)

P.S. I want to add something to my original post:
When a body moves through space filled with air, then higher pressure is created in front of it, while lower pressure/depressure behind it. The higher pressure is plus, the lower pressure is minus. I use to call this a ‘principle of an arrow’ (− >—> +).

The greater the velocity of the body is, the stronger is the Plus in front of it as well as the Minus behind it. This principle can be found in many things, among others also in the so-called “Bernoulli’s principle”. (see What is the Bernoulli's principle? https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=17067.msg587651#msg587651)
The cavitation of the underwater propeller is actually the Minus - the Negative of the water motion. Similarly, the magnetic current is the Negative of the electric current. In other words, the electricity is Plus, the magneticity is Minus. This is a polarity of first order. There is further once more a Plus and a Minus both in electricity and in magneticity. It is a polarity of second order.

[evan_au]

electric spark generated using sharp and blunt electrodes

Thanks for showing the experiment - as you mention, the spacing of the electrodes has a big impact - you are essentially measuring the breakdown voltage of air.

As for "sharp" vs "blunt" electrodes, they both are made of a single strand of wire, so the dominant effect causing breakdown of the air is not the ≈2cm diameter circle of the blunt electrode, but the ≈0.5mm diameter of the wire.
- The sharp electrode is made of the same wire, so it has the same ≈0.5mm diameter of the wire.
- So they are not really blunter and sharper

If you wanted to build a really "blunt" electrode, you would need to make a ≈2cm diameter sphere.
- And if you wanted to make an even sharper electrode, you could sand it to a point (but this is difficult to do with copper, because it bends so easily).

PS: Was the narration done via a voice synthesizer?

[Bored chemist]

This is one more evidence that the Plus-electricity has a property of blowing, whereas the Minus-electricity a property of suctioning.

No, it's not.

This principle can be found in many things, among others also in the so-called “Bernoulli’s principle”.

No, it's not.

(see What is the Bernoulli's principle? https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?)topic=17067.msg587651#msg587651)

That link goes nowhere.

In other words, the electricity is Plus, the magneticity is Minus.

You have resorted to making up words to say things that make no sense...

This is a polarity of first order. There is further once more a Plus and a Minus both in electricity and in magneticity. It is a polarity of second order.

Tosh.

Why do you do this?

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

Why do you do this?

If you live long enough, you will understand.

Thanks for letting me know about the bad link.

[Bored chemist]

If you live long enough, you will understand.

How long do I need to live before I understand why you post what is clearly nonsense on a science site?

[Bored chemist]

Thanks for letting me know about the bad link.

It now points to a page where you hijack a thread about the Bernoulli principle and talk nonsense about currents. (And advertise your "book").

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

If you live long enough, you will understand.

How long do I need to live before I understand why you post what is clearly nonsense on a science site?

The time will tell what a nonsense is, whether my explanation or some tiny particles running through the wires.
The time will tell what a nonsense is, whether the real flow of the current is from Plus to Minus or vice versa.
The time will what a nonsense is, whether the magnetic field (actually the magnetic current) is spirally shaped or like many rings closed in themselves.
usw, usw...

And please, don't get upset. It's not good for your health.

[Bored chemist]

The time will tell what a nonsense is, whether my explanation or some tiny particles running through the wires.
The time will tell what a nonsense is, whether the real flow of the current is from Plus to Minus or vice versa.
The time will what a nonsense is, whether the magnetic field (actually the magnetic current) is spirally shaped or like many rings closed in themselves.

Time told us that about a hundred years or more ago.

All you have done is show that you don't understand it.

In the meantime, perhaps you can explain electron microscopes and cathode rays (in a good vacuum) without

some tiny particles running through the wires.

The time will tell what a nonsense is, whether the real flow of the current is from Plus to Minus or vice versa.

Both.

[hamdani yusuf]

Using only one video there are some uncertainties we need to resolve before getting a firm conclusion, such as does the type of medium makes a difference? A vacuum tube clearly gives us a different result.
The video uses distilled water, so the electric current is formed by the movement of H+ and OH- ions. They have significantly different molar masses. If we use a medium where the positive ions are heavier than the negative ions, will we get the same result?

[hamdani yusuf]

Here is another video showing electrostatic levitation.

Here is some comment of the uploader.

I tried reversing the polarity  but it doesn’t levitate. It sits a couple of mm above the bottom plate.  Also the Corona hissing goes away with the polarity reversed. May need a different aluminum form.

[hamdani yusuf]

Here is a new development in electronics that shows asymmetry between positive and negative electric charges.
https://physicsworld.com/a/nasa-scientists-design-a-nanoscale-complementary-vacuum-field-emission-transistor/

What is a complementary device and why has it not been possible to create a complementary VFET?
In conventional metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs), we have n-type and p-type devices –NMOS and PMOS respectively.  This is readily possible since semiconductors can be doped either way. The availability of these two types allows construction of a CMOS with the two devices working as a pair. When connected to a common input voltage, they work in opposite fashion: when one transistor is on, the other is off. This allows the CMOS to operate using less power.

Complementary operation of VFET has not been possible because there is no semiconductor material in the channel for doping and no possibility to create holes to make a p-type device.  VFET is unipolar since it is electron only.

How does your design overcome these challenges?
The primary (or the only) source of carriers in a vacuum device is electrons, resulting from the field emission in the source electrode. In the absence of holes, we need an external mechanism to invoke complementary operation (see figure below). That mechanism here is the nanoelectromechanical (NEM) actuation of the gate that modulates the vacuum channel length and resultantly the electron transport across the source-drain channel with the gate voltage. A shorter vacuum channel length is formed, and a positive input voltage turns on the n-type device and a negative input voltage turns on the p-type device.

The NEM-driven gate modulation is a successful technology employed in NEMS-relay switches and other low power electronics.