Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

mathstodon.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 254 posts

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#111

Post by hollerith »

ViktorRay wrote: post #95
hollerith wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turn it into a theory that predicts exact quantities (accelerations) and I will start paying attention.

Well why wouldn’t it? The mathematical constants could remain the same as in the current theories. Both the constant G for gravitation and g for the acceleration for gravity on earth. I am not a physicist so I may be getting something wrong

Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (published 1687) contains a mathematical (geometric actually) proof that the gravitational attraction between the Earth an a man standing on the surface of the Earth is the same as it would be if all of the mass of the Earth were at its center. There's another proof that if the man is standing at the bottom of a one-mile hole, and the Earth is assumed to be a perfect sphere, then the attraction is the same as if the Earth's radius were one mile less than it actually is (i.e., the attraction between the man and the shell of mass higher in altitude than the man is exactly zero because the attraction from the various points in the one-mile-thick shell exactly cancel out).

That is that kind of thing I mean: proofs and calculations, not "why wouldn't it?"

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#112

Post by abecedarius »

marmadukester39 wrote: post #103
bequanna wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Coming from everywhere and moving outward in all directions at all times and ‘absorbed’ or ‘blocked’ by mass

Physicists: Has anyone ever looked into this?

Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_explanations_of_gra...

(but I only play a physicist on HN)

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#113

Post by B1FF_PSUVM »

a1445c8b wrote: post #73
somat wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a much better term, battery: inconsequential detail on how it is constructed. accumulator: what it does.

Using the word “accumulator” wouldn’t be enough to differentiate batteries from capacitors, inductors, etc. which are also accumulators.

> inductors, etc. which are also accumulators.

In what sense do inductors accumulate?

Batteries and capacitors accumulate (i.e. integrate) current.

Inductors differentiate current: v = L di/dt means you get voltage out of current changes.

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#114

Post by remram »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #87
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why I think he was wrong . Normally, pretty much everywhere else we use the terms, "positive" denotes the presence or addition of something, while "negative" denotes the absence or subtraction. So while I agree with the GP's comment that Franklin didn't know anything about electrons, so he arbitrarily picked one as negative and the other as positive, now that we do know about the movement of electrons…

Not really, we talk about bubbles moving up, not water moving down. Current is bubbles.

We do talk about water moving down though. There is no reason current should be bubbles.

A rationalization after the fact is different from a reason.

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#116

Post by lynndotpy »

philipov wrote: post #105
throwway120385 wrote: post #13

Because he didn't know anything about electrons, and the experiment he did involving rubbing amber and glass rods on fur and silk cloth only showed that something was transferred between the two materials, and that when the material containing the substance was brought near to the other material containing the other substance, the property conferred by the substances appeared to negate. If you read Teaching Introduct…

> We could just as easily have called it "black" or "white" charge And when we found a charge system that had 3 charges rather than just two, we did .

Where can I learn more on this? Searching yields nothing.

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#117

Post by crazygringo »

bmacho wrote: post #100
crazygringo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK... so you've quoted them again. You still haven't explained why it isn't true, or why it's trolling. Just saying those things doesn't make them true. I can tell that English is not your native language from the number of grammatical errors you're making, so perhaps you're confused about something linguistic here?

1. the air is negative 2. the air's temperature is negative 3. the air's temperature is -1°C 1. the electron is negative 2. the electron's charge is negative 3. the electron's charge is -1 p and there are more levels in between and with higher precision. But you see, the 3rd version is true, not confusing, not surprising. The 2nd version is somehow fishy, but accepted in practice, when people operate in good faith, a…

Thank you for explaining your viewpoint. And I have to say I'm sorry, but you're just simply incorrect about this.

Again, it's clear English isn't your native language, and I suspect you're simply making a mistake about how English is used. Which is not uncommon -- I've made plenty of mistakes thinking that how something worked conceptually in English would apply to another language too, and then being corrected by a native speaker.

In English, it's perfectly conventional to say "the electron is negative" when you're talking about charge. It is linguistically and conceptually correct. There is nothing "fishy" and certainly nobody is "trolling", which is an unfair and uncharitable accusation for you to make.

Perhaps it isn't correct to say in your native language, I don't know. I'm sorry you didn't like this conversation, but hopefully you can use it as a learning opportunity.

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#118

Post by tekno45 »

lynndotpy wrote: post #116
philipov wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could just as easily have called it "black" or "white" charge And when we found a charge system that had 3 charges rather than just two, we did .

Where can I learn more on this? Searching yields nothing.

https://youtu.be/AOtUo25GB3c?list=TLPQMjEwNjIwMjQajcfSE5215w

Kinda

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#119

Post by warhorse10_9 »

lynndotpy wrote: post #116
philipov wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could just as easily have called it "black" or "white" charge And when we found a charge system that had 3 charges rather than just two, we did .

Where can I learn more on this? Searching yields nothing.

Read up on “color charge.”

Re: Why does current flow the opposite way from the electrons?

#120

Post by dotnet00 »

bmacho wrote: post #100
crazygringo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK... so you've quoted them again. You still haven't explained why it isn't true, or why it's trolling. Just saying those things doesn't make them true. I can tell that English is not your native language from the number of grammatical errors you're making, so perhaps you're confused about something linguistic here?

1. the air is negative 2. the air's temperature is negative 3. the air's temperature is -1°C 1. the electron is negative 2. the electron's charge is negative 3. the electron's charge is -1 p and there are more levels in between and with higher precision. But you see, the 3rd version is true, not confusing, not surprising. The 2nd version is somehow fishy, but accepted in practice, when people operate in good faith, a…

I think you'll find that most people who would understand 2 and 3 would also understand the meaning of "the electron is negative" perfectly well, as humans (and at this point, probably LLMs too lol) can infer that the intent is to say 3, especially in this casual context of a social media discussion among normal people.

It isn't like "the air is negative", which has many context dependent meanings.

Post reply on HN