Re: "Charged" capacitor mis-terminology

[brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>]

At 09:11 2/18/98 -0800, Mark Shapiro wrote:
> 	This discussion of capacitors reminds me of the interminable
> philosophical discussions about how many angles can dance on the head of a
> pin. 

Non angli sed angeli?

> ... If the process of charging a capacitor is discussed with reasonable
> care, most - if not all students - understand that one plate ends up with
> an EXCESS of positive charge, while the other ends up with an EXCESS of
> negative charge.  In most - but not all - case the capacitor remains
> neutral.

I was wondering when someone was going to go for the ring!

 Instead I thought I would settle for belaboring David Bowman 
(a rare pleasure indeed!) for so confidently associating particular 
mechanical model features with electronic ones - a grave mistake, in
my humble view. If charging capacitors can rouse a few engineers or
physicists from their placid demeanor, the idea of a 1 to 1 mapping on
 some mechanical vs electrical model can rouse a vocal subset of people
 from the dead: the usual conclusion - after internecine war has been 
concluded - is that there are several coherent mechanical mappings 
onto an electrical model - and leave it at that!

Regards


brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
Altus OK