Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: All that glisters is not gold



Brian Whatcott took an opportunity to tweak (thge noses, I guess) of
"inconoclasts" who remind people that conduction electrons travel slowly
around a circuit. I've got no objection to having my nose tweaked but I'm
not quite sure why.
Lets' look at what some of what Brian wrote, annotating as I go.

I note that resistive
differences are not principally assigned to differences in the number of
conduction electrons, but rather in their 'mobility'.

I agree with you on that.


In this respect, it's helpful to tweak the iconoclasts who take pleasure
in reminding us that electrons do not travel down a wire at near the speed
of light, (though energy usually does),

I agree about the electron speed and the energy speed but note that the
energy, which is carried by the elctromagnetic field, does not go down the
wire but through the space not the wire.

about a statistical feature of electron motion, so to speak.

Notwithstanding their strictures about the snail's pace of DRIFT
velocity - it is quite permissible to visualize electron velocity as
several million meters per second (electric field or no...)


No, I can't see that at all, even after I read what you write - I'm missing
something

The model for resistance in metals is the probability that an electron
will collide with an ionic barrier.

Yes, I agree with that but, I'm sorry, Brian, I can't see why that lets
you think that electrons are up and away

Ref 1 holds up nickel vs. nichrome
as an example of two materials with very similar numbers of conduction
electrons, but widely different resistivity (20:1)

Again, no problem. What am I missing?

Brian McInnes