[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
[Apologies for excessive article nesting]
Tesla List wrote:
>
> >From pgantt-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-comSat Nov 9 21:50:14 1996
> Date: Sat, 9 Nov 1996 19:14:27 -0800
> From: pgantt-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com
> To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
>
> On 11/06/96 22:25:02 you wrote:
> >
> >>From lod-at-pacbell-dot-netWed Nov 6 21:27:20 1996
> >Date: Sun, 05 Nov 1995 23:45:03 +0000
> >From: GE Leyh <lod-at-pacbell-dot-net>
> >To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> >Subject: Re: Capacitor charge, were is it?
> >
> >
> >Richard Hull wrote:
> >
> >> The electron charge is fortuitous and was locked in as unit charge for
> >> convenience and not as a be all end all unit of charge. Fractional
> >> charges do not bug me! When we say their is X amount of charge in the
> >> air or space about a metallic sphere, I have never associated it with
> >> electrons, it is just charge and nothing else. The fact that we can
> >> equate it to our fixed real world example, just gives us an anchor point.
> >> ( that the charge represents the presence of so and so many
> >> electrons---it doesn't, of course).
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> Richard Hull, TCBOR
> >
> >
> >I don't believe that an electric charge has ever been observed in vacuum;
> >negative charges reside in electrons, and positive charges reside in
> >positrons (proton = neutron + positron). Do you have any experimental
> >data that would indicate otherwise?
> ><snip>
> >
> >-GL
>
>
> Perhaps the answer to this dilemma is to say that the effects of charge can
> be transferred through a vacuum. Not that the vacuum has a charge.
>
> Phil Gantt (pgantt-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com)
> http://www-dot-netcom-dot-com/~pgantt/intro.html
I agree completely. It may seem like a minor distinction, but it's a very
important and fundamental one, which is why I've been harping on this topic so much.
Sorry about any excess bandwidth on this subject.
-GL