The highest electron pressure on Earth will be found at the center of mass for the planet. There electrons will be interacting. The slight over-pressure of electrons will cause some of these particles to want to escape. Given that electrons tend to travel at speeds that are about 1% of the speed of light these particles speed outwards.
The electron will want to move along a gradient that is from high density to low density. Given the relative spacing of atoms in the lattice of the earth's core an electron might make it quite far. The main takeaway is that the fast moving particles are moving fast.
If particles are leaving the Earth's center of mass they will be quickly replaced. The replacement will not be in quite the same manner as the outward bound electrons. The replacement electron will likely slide in from a nearby atom or molecule. Just like stepping down a ladder the electrons will backfill the electron that left. Eventually the electron that left rapidly will slow down and become one of the electrons that backfill.
So we have light fast moving particles that move from the center of mass towards the periphery. This movement causes a counter-movement of mass towards the center of mass. This is analogous to the return path of an electric circuit. In this case the return electrons drag positively charge nuclei with them. This creates an overwhelming slow pull inwards towards the center of mass. This is gravity.
Monday, 27 June 2016
Saturday, 25 June 2016
Telegrapher's Equations Revisited
Oliver Heaviside presented his version of electricity to humanity as the vector calculus version of Maxwell's nine equations. Heaviside also introduced us to the telegrapher's equations. The telegrapher's model for conductors remains with us to this day. Series resistance added linearly to a series inductance with a shunt resistance and a shunt capacitance.
Let's look at what this means as far as I learned in school as an electrical engineering student. The series resistance is easy to explain. Any conductor, copper for example, is made up of a lattice. as electrons traverse the lattice they accelerate and then slam into nuclei that make up the lattice. Electrons must also, critically, interact with one another. Traditionally we will say that some of the electrons repel each other when they come close to each other. All this bumping and grinding causes resistive loses.
Inductance tradition would tell us comes from the fact that every current carrying conductor has a magnetic field around it in the shape of an ellipse according to Gauss and Maxwell's magnetic equation. The magnetic field must be induced when the current starts to flow hence induction. The opposite happens when the current stops flowing.
I was taught that capacitance refers to the capacity of an electric field to store energy. For every telegraph line there is a return path for electrons. Phone and telegraph circuits work best when the return circuit is a conductor like the signal path. Capacitance is the representation in the telegrapher's model of the electric field. The electric field must be set up and it will unload its electrical energy when the circuit is de-energized.
Shunt conductance is the most ignored of the four elements of the telegraphy model. I'm not sure it should be. The conductance represents straight leakage from the signal path to the return path. Sounds simple but we ignore it to our peril in understanding how electric circuits really work.
Inductance and capacitance should be understood in terms of the shunt conductance; at least as far as the telegrapher's equations go. These two elements of the model store energy and then give it back.
Inductance should be explained without the use of a mythical magnetic field. Electrons accelerated down a conductor are going to pop off the conductor and statistically will make their way through any dielectric cladding. Electrons also have a massive propensity to spin in the presence of molecules. The spin or curl of the electron field is what has fooled humanity into believing in a mythical magnetic field. The spinning electrons in an eddy field will store energy regardless of how we want to perceive Maxwell and Heaviside's equations.
That leaves us with another highly statistical behaviour of capacitance. Some electrons that are accelerated off the signal wire will spin while others won't. The electrons that don't spin form the capacitive part of the telegraphers model. When the line is de-energized the electrons come back to the signal wire completing the capacitive model.
To summarize, electrons pop off the wire when there is an abundance of these elementary particles. Some electrons make it to the return wire forming conductance. Some electrons spin and this is represented by the inductive part of the telegrapher model. Other electrons pop off the line and don't make it to the opposing voltage line. This is capacitance.
Let's look at what this means as far as I learned in school as an electrical engineering student. The series resistance is easy to explain. Any conductor, copper for example, is made up of a lattice. as electrons traverse the lattice they accelerate and then slam into nuclei that make up the lattice. Electrons must also, critically, interact with one another. Traditionally we will say that some of the electrons repel each other when they come close to each other. All this bumping and grinding causes resistive loses.
Inductance tradition would tell us comes from the fact that every current carrying conductor has a magnetic field around it in the shape of an ellipse according to Gauss and Maxwell's magnetic equation. The magnetic field must be induced when the current starts to flow hence induction. The opposite happens when the current stops flowing.
I was taught that capacitance refers to the capacity of an electric field to store energy. For every telegraph line there is a return path for electrons. Phone and telegraph circuits work best when the return circuit is a conductor like the signal path. Capacitance is the representation in the telegrapher's model of the electric field. The electric field must be set up and it will unload its electrical energy when the circuit is de-energized.
Shunt conductance is the most ignored of the four elements of the telegraphy model. I'm not sure it should be. The conductance represents straight leakage from the signal path to the return path. Sounds simple but we ignore it to our peril in understanding how electric circuits really work.
Inductance and capacitance should be understood in terms of the shunt conductance; at least as far as the telegrapher's equations go. These two elements of the model store energy and then give it back.
Inductance should be explained without the use of a mythical magnetic field. Electrons accelerated down a conductor are going to pop off the conductor and statistically will make their way through any dielectric cladding. Electrons also have a massive propensity to spin in the presence of molecules. The spin or curl of the electron field is what has fooled humanity into believing in a mythical magnetic field. The spinning electrons in an eddy field will store energy regardless of how we want to perceive Maxwell and Heaviside's equations.
That leaves us with another highly statistical behaviour of capacitance. Some electrons that are accelerated off the signal wire will spin while others won't. The electrons that don't spin form the capacitive part of the telegraphers model. When the line is de-energized the electrons come back to the signal wire completing the capacitive model.
To summarize, electrons pop off the wire when there is an abundance of these elementary particles. Some electrons make it to the return wire forming conductance. Some electrons spin and this is represented by the inductive part of the telegrapher model. Other electrons pop off the line and don't make it to the opposing voltage line. This is capacitance.
Thursday, 23 June 2016
More London Forces Excitment
How exciting are the London Forces? These forces exert themselves on the polarity of both atoms and molecules. UCLA's chemistry department points out that all atoms and molecules exhibit the London Force. The strength increases with the number of electrons. If only this University would elaborate.
What are the trends as molecules or atoms become larger? How fast do the London Forces grow? Do the London Forces diminish in growth as a molecule or grouping of molecules grow?
It looks to me like there is a fundamental disconnect between chemistry's understanding of atoms and the reality of particles under the influence of gravity. Do electrons have clouds? Maybe through probability theory but realistically those electrons are moving fast. So fast do electrons move that one might even call their combined interactions more of a fluid than a cloud surrounding a nucleus. I distinguish between atoms under planetary gravitational influence and atoms that aren't. There is evidence that near the earth plasma's set up in low gravity. The plasma may have very particular properties. Lots of electrons or lots of 'positive' ions.
So the London Force adds up with diminishing exponential growth of the force.We can add a lot of what looks like an electron fluid and call it gravity. A mass of any size is going to have shifting forces that ultimately pull towards the center of mass. The electrons at the center of a mass will have an outward exertion at 1% or more of the speed of light. This out-push of electrons will eventually attenuate in velocity and kinetic energy. Other less kinetic electrons will take the out-pushed electrons place. The result is gravity.
What are the trends as molecules or atoms become larger? How fast do the London Forces grow? Do the London Forces diminish in growth as a molecule or grouping of molecules grow?
It looks to me like there is a fundamental disconnect between chemistry's understanding of atoms and the reality of particles under the influence of gravity. Do electrons have clouds? Maybe through probability theory but realistically those electrons are moving fast. So fast do electrons move that one might even call their combined interactions more of a fluid than a cloud surrounding a nucleus. I distinguish between atoms under planetary gravitational influence and atoms that aren't. There is evidence that near the earth plasma's set up in low gravity. The plasma may have very particular properties. Lots of electrons or lots of 'positive' ions.
So the London Force adds up with diminishing exponential growth of the force.We can add a lot of what looks like an electron fluid and call it gravity. A mass of any size is going to have shifting forces that ultimately pull towards the center of mass. The electrons at the center of a mass will have an outward exertion at 1% or more of the speed of light. This out-push of electrons will eventually attenuate in velocity and kinetic energy. Other less kinetic electrons will take the out-pushed electrons place. The result is gravity.
Sunday, 19 June 2016
London Forces are Linear and Additive - Multiplicative
London forces are fairly basic forces. They represent a fairly geometric positive-negative view of the world. No self-respecting physicist would ever believe the truth to be that simple but we all must rely on models. Here our model is clear. An abundance of fast moving negative charge will exhibit self repulsion. This will propagate negative charge into diverse places. The charge balance will re-establish itself eventually and the return path of lower energy electrons and the process will begin again.
So if we consider a mass of any size or shape we end up with an additive or multiplicative force of attraction that causes the mass have a tendency to clump and stick together. This is the basis of gravity and it has an electrical analog. The proximate electrons at the center of a dense space are 'hot' and these electrons make their way towards the periphery of the mass. The electrons eventually make their way back through the return path down towards the center of the mass.
The nucleus follows or does the opposite of the electrons. Remember that the root mean squared speed of electrons is way faster than the the rms speed of the nucleus which carries so much mass. This is the electro-chemical basis for the so called weak force of gravity.
So if we consider a mass of any size or shape we end up with an additive or multiplicative force of attraction that causes the mass have a tendency to clump and stick together. This is the basis of gravity and it has an electrical analog. The proximate electrons at the center of a dense space are 'hot' and these electrons make their way towards the periphery of the mass. The electrons eventually make their way back through the return path down towards the center of the mass.
The nucleus follows or does the opposite of the electrons. Remember that the root mean squared speed of electrons is way faster than the the rms speed of the nucleus which carries so much mass. This is the electro-chemical basis for the so called weak force of gravity.
Sunday, 5 June 2016
London Forces and Electromagnetic Conduction
This blog may be the first look at these two seemingly disparate topics. Chemistry has this oft hidden topic of the London forces. Part of the van der Waals series of forces they attempt to deal with what ionic and covalent bonds cannot tackle.
My problem is that I think I have a fairly good idea of what Dr. London was getting at when he wrote about these attractions years ago. There seems to be very little written about the London dispersion force. What is written almost makes it sound simple. Add a little Poisson Stoichastics and additive theory or considerations of linearity & additive Gaussian functions and this dispersion force is anything but simple! There is reason to think that this type of interaction may have broad ranging applications from one end of the universe to the other (big wink on that last statement)
To know more about the far reaching possibilities of the London force please take a look at my past posts about electromagnetism and gravity. I must digress to the London force and conduction.
The London force seems to deal strictly with instantaneous or dipoles that arrange themselves for small periods of time. Statistically when ten to the fifteen atoms are involved I would hardly say theses types of interactions are few and far between. To ditch the pejorative I would simply state these forces are a big deal in any system with more than ten to the fifteenth number of atoms. I mean what if it can be proved that the additive property of these forces add to gravity?
So if an electromagnetic is propagating most quickly at the border between the conducting metal lattice and the dielectric what can we say about the London forces at this junction. I know these topics are disperate and maybe not always be associated but follow me please. The excess negative charge present at the boundary is going to polarize the atoms at the boundary of the conductor and the dielectric.
While these forces can hardly be said to be London forces they certainly do add up and should be considered in the propagated electromagnetic wave from a conductor or an antenna if the conductor is exhibiting antenna-like properties. Another blog post will have to explore how these early statistical diploles manifest themselves and then propagate. They originate in the power supply through a whipping and then pumping (regulation) action by the various rotor, stator and then semiconductors in the signal path.
My problem is that I think I have a fairly good idea of what Dr. London was getting at when he wrote about these attractions years ago. There seems to be very little written about the London dispersion force. What is written almost makes it sound simple. Add a little Poisson Stoichastics and additive theory or considerations of linearity & additive Gaussian functions and this dispersion force is anything but simple! There is reason to think that this type of interaction may have broad ranging applications from one end of the universe to the other (big wink on that last statement)
To know more about the far reaching possibilities of the London force please take a look at my past posts about electromagnetism and gravity. I must digress to the London force and conduction.
The London force seems to deal strictly with instantaneous or dipoles that arrange themselves for small periods of time. Statistically when ten to the fifteen atoms are involved I would hardly say theses types of interactions are few and far between. To ditch the pejorative I would simply state these forces are a big deal in any system with more than ten to the fifteenth number of atoms. I mean what if it can be proved that the additive property of these forces add to gravity?
So if an electromagnetic is propagating most quickly at the border between the conducting metal lattice and the dielectric what can we say about the London forces at this junction. I know these topics are disperate and maybe not always be associated but follow me please. The excess negative charge present at the boundary is going to polarize the atoms at the boundary of the conductor and the dielectric.
While these forces can hardly be said to be London forces they certainly do add up and should be considered in the propagated electromagnetic wave from a conductor or an antenna if the conductor is exhibiting antenna-like properties. Another blog post will have to explore how these early statistical diploles manifest themselves and then propagate. They originate in the power supply through a whipping and then pumping (regulation) action by the various rotor, stator and then semiconductors in the signal path.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)