# Are my Assumptions Right?

#### Shafty

Joined Apr 25, 2023
189
Electricity is Magic!
No Electrons are wasted but Grounded at Last...
Power Needed for a Device is nothing but How much electrons a Device need to Suck to Run...
So My Main Question is If we put the Higher Electron Sucking Machines at the last of the circuit and we can put the lower ones before in the same line of conduct (Wire) we just have to pay only the Electricity Fee of that Larger Device?
Am I Right?
I haven't studied any of this but my rough guessings. Please clarify to promote to the next level called "Knowledge".
Thanks
Single Line of Conduct? - How about Optic Fibre?

#### ElectricSpidey

Joined Dec 2, 2017
2,880
"Electricity is Magic!"

Well, you got that part right.

#### crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
34,827
Am I Right?
Not even close.
I haven't studied any of this but my rough guessings.
That's about the roughest guessings I've ever heard.

Where to begin--
Devices don't "suck" electrons.
The current (electrons) goes through a device based on its impedance and the applied voltage (Ohm's law).
You have to "pay" for the electricity that all connected devices use (the currents add together).
What one uses does not affect what the others use.
Optic fiber conducts light not electricity, hence the name optic(al).

Last edited:

#### Jon Chandler

Joined Jun 12, 2008
1,094
Here's the short answer, which I believe applies to a number of questions you've asked:

There's no such thing as a free lunch.

#### nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,543
Electricity is Magic!
No Electrons are wasted but Grounded at Last...
Power Needed for a Device is nothing but How much electrons a Device need to Suck to Run...
So My Main Question is If we put the Higher Electron Sucking Machines at the last of the circuit and we can put the lower ones before in the same line of conduct (Wire) we just have to pay only the Electricity Fee of that Larger Device?
Am I Right?
I haven't studied any of this but my rough guessings. Please clarify to promote to the next level called "Knowledge".
Thanks
Single Line of Conduct? - How about Optic Fibre?
You need a total reboot on just about everything you said, but first forget electrons. Using Electrons in these types of questions and 'explanations' about electrical energy is a code word for complete ignorance.

That complete ignorance can be easily cured by the study of basic electrical principles.

Last edited:

#### dl324

Joined Mar 30, 2015
17,106
So My Main Question is If we put the Higher Electron Sucking Machines at the last of the circuit and we can put the lower ones before in the same line of conduct (Wire) we just have to pay only the Electricity Fee of that Larger Device?
Am I Right?
No. Each device will draw current.

#### Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,475
I'm thinking this thread needs to be in the off topic since it is neither technology nor science.

#### Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,475
TANSTAFL.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
You can't quit you can't win you can't break even.
Basically is near as I can tell you're asking about conversion from one wattage to another. The device will get its required juice or it won't work.

#### Ya’akov

Joined Jan 27, 2019
9,264
You can't quit you can't win you can't break even.
While Heinlein did popularize TANSTAFL in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the edgy take on thermodynamics isn't his.

In fact, it is hard to tell just where it came from. It's often called "Ginsberg's Law" after the poet Allen Ginsberg who gets the credit in 1975.

But, it clearly appeared before that, and the most convincing version of things attributes it to British scientist C.P. Snow, attested by his students, in the 1950s.

This early version appears in 1956 in Astounding Science Fiction:

The Three Laws of Thermodynamics, translated from Mathematics into English, come out:
1. You can’t win.
2. You can’t even break even.
3. Furthermore, you can’t get out of the game!

However, Information Theory shows that Information is negative entropy; so the Three Laws of Infodynamics are:
1. You can win.
2. Furthermore, you can support a friend.
3. And you can quit the game when you’re ahead!

Thanks to
Dr. Wayne Batteau,
Harvard Speculative Society.

#### Ya’akov

Joined Jan 27, 2019
9,264
I was thinking about this and to come to this sort of mental model it’s necessary to be completely unaware of what work, power, and energy are, and how they are related.

Electricity is not magic, the magic is making it do things we find useful. Electricity is invisible, and it may be subtle, but it is consistent and sensible when taken as a whole. Magic is always about technology—not the forces harnessed.

#### nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,543
"Electricity is Magic" only if mechanical principles are magical. I guess for most people, a Internal Combustion Engine is also magic.

#### Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,475
When I was a teen electronics seemed magical, and since I was a fantasy geek as well as a science nerd I started playing with it to learn this mysterious lore, back then RadioShack was my friend as it had both kits and books I glomed onto the Forest Mimms III books and started playing with electronics at home. This also included things like crystal radios and a shortwave receiver. I mean I was getting news and programming from across the oceans how can that not be magic?

#### ElectricSpidey

Joined Dec 2, 2017
2,880
There are some definitions of "Magic" that suit Electricity to a tee.

Noun: 4. any mysterious or extraordinary quality or power: the magic of springtime.

Adj: 9. informal wonderful; marvelous; exciting

#### crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
34,827
Arthur C. Clarks 3rd law:

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

#### Ya’akov

Joined Jan 27, 2019
9,264
Arthur C. Clarks 3rd law:

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from techonology."
—Ya'akov's Corollary to Clark's 3rd Law; from the unpublished monograph "Just What is a Wizard Anyway?"

#### Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,475
A EE? There are a lot of people out there whom believe that magic truly does exist. I'm not one of them. Though I still enjoy reading fantasy.

#### BobTPH

Joined Jun 5, 2013
9,256
Scientists are magicians who reveal their tricks.

#### nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,543
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from techonology."
—Ya'akov's Corollary to Clark's 3rd Law; from the unpublished monograph "Just What is a Wizard Anyway?"

My definition of magic is a macroscopic breaking of thermodynamics (is magic). IE you don't need energy in the form of physical forces or matter for 'work' or action.

Technology is just physics, while magic is the supernatural beyond physics.
https://www.ancestralstars.com/wp/events/thermodynamics-of-magic-systems/

#### Ya’akov

Joined Jan 27, 2019
9,264
Technology is just physics, while magic is the supernatural beyond physics.
Well, we'll have to disagree on this one.

All through history wizards were just people who could make and/or use technology. They might have been (al)chemists, or hydraulics engineers—but what they shared was the knowledge of how to take matter and combine so that it would do something desirable.

A wizard is a person who does something with bits of the world that someone else doesn't know how to do. It is often the case the wizards themselves don't know why things work only how to put them together.

So, "magic", the is effective magic is nothing more than technology, so it follows that if your magic is good enough it will be indistinguishable from technology. If it is bad magic, then it will be just a little technology and a lot of nonsense—it might do something but a lot of it will do nothing at all—and if gives magic a bad name.

#### nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,543
Well, we'll have to disagree on this one.

All through history wizards were just people who could make and/or use technology. They might have been (al)chemists, or hydraulics engineers—but what they shared was the knowledge of how to take matter and combine so that it would do something desirable.

A wizard is a person who does something with bits of the world that someone else doesn't know how to do. It is often the case the wizards themselves don't know why things work only how to put them together.

So, "magic", the is effective magic is nothing more than technology, so it follows that if your magic is good enough it will be indistinguishable from technology. If it is bad magic, then it will be just a little technology and a lot of nonsense—it might do something but a lot of it will do nothing at all—and if gives magic a bad name.
None of those guys did supernatural 'magic' nor were they 'really' wizards. Anything claimed as supernatural magic involves deception, misdirection, illusion and trickery.

There is no magic or wizardry required to understand electricity or the electrical sciences. It's pretty basic if you're willing to take the time and effort to try.
The normal use of 'magic' in electrical technology/science is as a element of humor.

Last edited: