🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:51:14 UTC No. 16281834
Anyone smart enough here to realise that electric current is not a fundamental physical quantity but rather the property of a given object in the presence of different electric fields?
Given:
an object with resistance (r)
an electric field of a certain intensity (V/m)
With the object inside the electric field, we define current as the property (V/r). It doesn't exist as a separate physical concept but it's useful when connecting circuits such as your socket to your computer.
It's not the mythical *current* that would fry your electronics, but simply applying too much voltage on too little a resistance. Which sounds like the same thing, except that you don't rot your brain with imagined superfluous concepts.
I could go on about how Voltage is not really a thing either, but let's leave it at that.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:57:34 UTC No. 16281838
cool, now try this explanation on /g/ or /ohm/
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 01:31:28 UTC No. 16281857
dude electrons are all in your mind like whoa
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 02:12:48 UTC No. 16281877
>>16281834
Charge is like energy, where it's not physical matter, it just is a property an object has. Electric fields are created when you have an object with some sort of charge. The amphere is the unit of current, which is defined in terms of coulombs per second. Current is merely the amount of charge moving past a certain point per second. Voltage is like water pressure while current is the size of the jet of water spraying. Frying electronics has to do with multiple factors, not voltage alone.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 02:39:00 UTC No. 16281887
>>16281834
You know that coulombs are defined in terms of amps, right?
>define current as the property (V/r).
For ohmic materials that's a decent approximation. Not true in general however
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 02:42:00 UTC No. 16281889
Yeah this is what people demonstrate when they stand on an insulating stool and touch normally fatal electrodes
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:00:00 UTC No. 16281901
>>16281887
>You know that coulombs are defined in terms of amps, right?
Okay, so keep an open mind.
>one ampere is equal to 1 coulomb (C) moving past a point per second
>one coulomb (C) is equal to the electric charge delivered by a 1 ampere current in 1 second
So essentially the coulomb is one ampere-second. The ampere itself was defined as "he current passing through two parallel wires 1 metre apart that produces a magnetic force of 2×10−7 newtons per metre". Since then that particular charge has been measured in terms of e (the elementary charge) and we have a precise value.
There is nothing important about these specifications, apart from helping make some formulas simpler to use. Current remains a measure, like speed for example. It's not a prime mover in any physical process.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:03:30 UTC No. 16281905
>>16281901
>. It's not a prime mover in any physical process
It's not a prime mover for electrolysis?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:15:51 UTC No. 16281914
>>16281905
>The key process of electrolysis is the interchange of atoms and ions by the removal or addition of electrons due to the applied potential.
Literally not, the existence of the "current" measure just helps you quantify the physical process. It doesn't "do" something. Practically tells you how far you need to turn the knob on your DC power supply to get the reaction you want.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:22:35 UTC No. 16281924
>>16281834
Yep. It always bothered me that it was the Ampere, not the Coulomb.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:26:16 UTC No. 16281933
>>16281834
What would the electrical discharge from the Sun to the Earth be if they were to touch?..