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

Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?

On 11/07/96 22:25:23 you wrote:
>
>>> <snip>> >Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
>
>>From paulmil-at-ibm-dot-netThu Nov  7 22:23:55 1996
>Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:55:33 GMT
>From: PAUL MILLOTT <paulmil-at-ibm-dot-net>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
>
> 
>>Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
>>
>>Tesla List wrote:
>>> 
>>> <snip>> >Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
> 
>>> You present an interesting argument in favor of vacuum holding charge.  
But,
>>> what is charge? Snip- 
>
>Phil,
>
>I understood that "charge" is an effect. Like the north pole of a magnet is
>an effect opposite to the south pole of the magnet. An electron has a
>negative charge. The charge is not a thing, it is only an  EFFECT  due to
>the presence of the electron. Protons and positrons create the same sort of
>effect.This effect occurs in the material we call free space or vacuum. (It
>is not free by the way, you have to pay for it)
>
> 
>>> Hence, if charge does not need mass (electrons), then it should be 
possible
>>> to have charge transfer, or current flow (dQ/dT) without the flow or
>>> movement of electrons.  Make sense?
>>>  
>Not to me again, (Sorry Phil),
>
>Current is measured as the flow of electrons. It has nothing to do with
>charge. Charges push the electrons along but without electrons you can not
>measure current flow. 

Current is defined as the rate of change of charge over time (I=dQ/dT).  It 
is not electron flow, per say.  In a conductor, electrons migrate rather 
than flow (too many atoms in the way for it to flow).  In a vacuum, however, 
electrons can flow unimpeded.

>
>>> Expounding further, if current can flow without electrons,(CURRENT MEANS
>ELECTRON FLOW I think?) then it should be possible somehow to extract 
energy
>(current flow) from free space.
>>> 
>>> What do you have to say about that?
>
>Here I go again Phil, (Not had enough medication today?)
>
>A transformer does just that. The primary of the Tesla coil does not at any
>time transfer electrons to the secondary, but the current flows in the
>secondary by extracting the energy from the free space around it.The free
>space flows around the secondary, having been stirred up by the effect from
>the electrons in the primary. The flowing "free space" pushes the electrons
>in the secondary around by acting on their charge and it is this  movement
>of electrons which you can measure as current and NOT the charge or effect
>which is pushing the electrons. A wave of "free space" is usually called
>electro-magnetic radiation.Don't know what the flow of free space is 
called.
> 
>Paul Millott. 
>

I believe it is the field interaction that causes the reaction in the 
secondary.  I don't think there is a "flow" in free space, but I may be 
wrong.  What I would ask is:  What flows?

My perception is that in the primary of a Tesla coil there are substantial 
disturbances caused by electron motion (current in the primary) that results 
in a time varying magnetic field.  This field results in a sympathetic 
reaction in the secondary (current flow) which is maximized when the circuit 
is properly tuned (resonance).

Perhaps we are talking about the same thing in different terms?

Phil

Phil Gantt (pgantt-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com)
http://www-dot-netcom-dot-com/~pgantt/intro.html