[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?

Tesla List wrote:
<BIGGG SNIP>

> >The electron is not
> >electromagnetic energy and is vastly different from all forms of radiant
> >energy (EM radiation).
> 
> And what is EM radiation?  We postulate that EM radiation is the propagation
> of "waves".  In air, sound waves propagate by molecular movement where one
> molecule transfers its energy to the next.  When we speak of radio type
> waves, we generally refer to a similar phenomenon, but instead of molecules
> banging into one another, we speak of orbital electrons transferring the
> energy.  As we get even higher in frequency, the behavior of waves takes on
> a different property, behaving more like particles or wave-packets.
> According to classical physics, gamma radiation is comprised of electrons
> moving through space at a high velocity.  In this respect, the electron
> behaves like any other form of EM radiation.
> 
> >The electron is a physical entity, a particle of
> >matter, and carries with it an electrical charge.
> 
> And what is matter, but mostly space.
> 
> >Conduction of electric
> >charge to do work can only be made through some form of charge carrier.
> >(metallic wires, a charged particle, etc. Dielectrics can store charge.
> >Space has both permittivity (abiltiy to store charge) and permeability
> >(ability to conduct magnetic lines of energy).  These are well known
> >properties of space and have very specific values.  Permitivity of free
> >space is equal to 8.8 picofarads per meter and the permeabilty of free
> >space is equal to 1.25 microhenry per meter.
> >
> > Electrically, and for power transmission purposes space is a tremendous
> >insulatior!  Only EM radiation can get through it but suffers horrible
> >losses based on the inverse square law.  A far better transfer of
> >electrical energy would be in the form of energetic charged beam of
> >particles like the electron.  They suffer almost zero loss in traversing
> >the vacuum of space whether in a vacuum tube or at stellar distances.
> >
> >Richard Hull, TCBOR
> >
> 
> I think you made my point.  Current is defined as the transfer of charge
> over time (I=dQ/dT).  Electrons flowing in a charged particle beam would
> indeed constitute a current flow in the traditional sense, even though there
> is no conductor (except space which offers little or no resistance to the
> flow of electrons).  Again, beta radiation is electron flow (current).
> 
> 
> Phil Gantt (pgantt-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com)
> http://www-dot-netcom-dot-com/~pgantt/intro.html

This is getting pretty far afield from Tesla Coilin' so this will be my
last post on this topic. Some final points:

A perfect vacuum IS a perfect insulator. Only when we introduce charged
particles can we force any current to flow. Within its operating limits,
a vacuum capacitor has virtually NO dielectric loss, and its leakage
resistance reflects only that of the glass bottle. Although
theoreticians can quibble about the fundamental nature of space, vacuum,
and virtual particles, this doesn't change the practical fact that a
vacuum capacitor is the next best thing to an ideal capacitor. A vacuum
cap is SUPERB for high-power RF work, but has too small a capacitance
and is too expensive for most practical coiling work.

Regarding EM wave propagation: the fact that an EM wave can propagate
through a media is actually more indicative of its non-conductive
properties (few free ions or electrons). It's actually quite difficult
to make transparent materials that are also highly conductive - just ask
liquid crystal display manufacturers...

One other semantic note: The inverse square law merely describes how
energy density is redistributed over larger areas as we increase the
distance from the energy source. It more appropriately reflects
conservation of energy, not losses stemming from transmission through
the vacuum. A tightly-focused laser beam suffers no attenuation loss in
a perfect vacuum (discounting effects from astronomical "red shift"...).
Microwave EM power transmission through a vacuum can actually be quite
efficient (without _any_ charged particles) as long as we control losses
from beam divergence, and has been suggested as a means for powering
orbital vehicles and for transmitting power to earth from an orbiting
solar array.

Safe, and virtual-particle-free, vacuum cappin' to ya!  :^)

-- Bert --