Now explain, as if trying to get your point across to somewhat just seeing this for the very first time, how to interpret the phrase, "the direction of the negative value for current," such that they would come up with those same answers to those same questions.

To solve for a value for electric current we must assign an arbitrary reference arrow. The value based on these arrows can be negative or positive. Let’s say we assign a reference arrow for current from left to right. If our value for that current is negative than the direction of the negative value for current is left to right. If our value for that reference arrow is positive then that means the actual negative value for current goes from right to left. You can use the sign to interpret whether you got the reference direction correct for the actual direction of positive current (or just current for short). You can also use the value to tell you something about the charge movements. If you reference arrow comes up with a negative value from left to right, than in a wire electrons move left to right. If you reference arrow comes up with a positive value from left to right, electrons move right to left. In either case, positive Actual current (or just current) always move opposite of the electrons.

 

It looks like you are being reasonably consistent in your own use. I think. But good luck getting anyone to agree that phrases like "direction of the negative value for current" are useful or intuitively meaningful.

 

It looks like you are being reasonably consistent in your own use. I think. But good luck getting anyone to agree that phrases like "direction of the negative value for current" are useful or intuitively meaningful.

Well I wouldn’t usually say that but it seems like you don’t agree on the other way I explained it. If I label a reference direction from a to b and give it a negative value I would say there’s a negative current from a to b. I think this is what you would call a negative actual current?

If we agree on that, we can make the next step and say the electrons are moving a to b?

So we have a negative current from a to b and electrons are flowing a to b so the way it makes sense to me to tie this together is to say that electrons are moving in the direction of negative current. Do I need to say negative actual current to make this correct? Or is it fair to say that just negative current is in the direction of electrons? This to me is just a derivation of the statement “current moves in the direction of positive charge”. If that statement is valid than it seems valid to say that negative current would move in the direction of negative charge?

 

It looks like you are being reasonably consistent in your own use. I think. But good luck getting anyone to agree that phrases like "direction of the negative value for current" are useful or intuitively meaningful.

I mean part of the reason why I said the direction of the negative value for current is because that’s what your question was. Could we go back to negative actual current? This is what I mean by electrons moving in the direction of negative current. If you have -10A going to the right electrons are going to the right, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that

 

I don't mean to be rude, but it's been 18 pages, and counting... I've seen this same exact discussion before, and it's never reached a conclusion that satisfies the parties involved. My question is, why?

 

I don't mean to be rude, but it's been 18 pages, and counting... I've seen this same exact discussion before, and it's never reached a conclusion that satisfies the parties involved. My question is, why?

I agree with you that a majority of this was not good discussion. This was when I was asking things without really understanding what I am asking. Now I am at a point where I think I have it all set but just want to confirm. If you look through, the last few pages have been about topics completely different from the beginning, so I would say it’s helped me out a lot. And I definitely understand what the conventions are now, just trying to iron out how we talk about OURS

 

I don't mean to be rude, but it's been 18 pages, and counting... I've seen this same exact discussion before, and it's never reached a conclusion that satisfies the parties involved. My question is, why?

Hoping to not sound rude myself either, I dare to ask, why not? Who knows if the OP is unconsciously competing with this one, nearing 90 pages!

BTW, according to the Sound Engineer in charge, the poor violinist mentioned in the OP there, committed suicide when he learnt what he started...

 

Hoping to not sound rude myself either, I dare to ask, why not? Who knows if the OP is unconsciously competing with this one, nearing 90 pages!

BTW, according to the Sound Engineer in charge, the poor violinist mentioned in the OP there, committed suicide when he learnt what he started...

Oh, I remember that conversation ... which I abandoned none too soon because it turned more into a philosophical discussion of the limits of reality itself... and I have better things to do, believe me. But I also remember a previous discussion some years ago (Bahn was not even a moderator back then) which turned a bit nasty at points. Don't get me wrong, I find this subject interesting, but it amazes me how complex and convoluted such a seemingly simple thing can get just because of people's different perspectives.

 

I can't believe you guys are still hashing this subject. It's been so brutally beaten to death so many times before. Or is this just a continuation of a previous beating on the subject.

Conventional current as defined by Benjamin Franklin is from positive to negative.
Electron flow as discovered to be the case is from negative to positive.

I just don't see what all the discussion is for. I've hesitated to toss my hat into this rink; and probably will regret having done so just now. But geez guys (and girls) it's not rocket science.

 

. But geez guys (and girls) it's not rocket science.

Not Rocket Surgery either!
Max.

 

I can't believe you guys are still hashing this subject. It's been so brutally beaten to death so many times before. Or is this just a continuation of a previous beating on the subject.

Conventional current as defined by Benjamin Franklin is from positive to negative.
Electron flow as discovered to be the case is from negative to positive.

I just don't see what all the discussion is for. I've hesitated to toss my hat into this rink; and probably will regret having done so just now. But geez guys (and girls) it's not rocket science.

I agree it’s not rocket science. Not trying to make it difficult. The only points I’m verifying is we say that Ben Franklin defined current as flowing positive to negative right? Okay so this is equivalent with saying he defined positive current as flowing positive to negative. Therefore the word current implies positive. This was not immediately apparent to me. So within Franklin convention we could also say that negative current flows from negative to positive? Therefore, in our convention negative current flows in the same direction as electrons because they both flow negative to positive. If all this is true than I understand perfectly, if not what am I still missing? This seems perfectly logical to me . I have realized that the other convention is to give the positive value of current to electron movement, but I am ignoring that and just looking within our convention

 

Hoping to not sound rude myself either, I dare to ask, why not? Who knows if the OP is unconsciously competing with this one, nearing 90 pages!

BTW, according to the Sound Engineer in charge, the poor violinist mentioned in the OP there, committed suicide when he learnt what he started...

Haha, no not trying to waste anybody’s time. I just feel like this is the best community on the internet to get a question like this answered, and I feel that I have almost all my points covered. As long as my last comment is all true.

 

Therefore the word current implies positive.

No. It doesn't. As your following comment quoted below says:

Therefore, in our convention negative current flows in the same direction as electrons because they both flow negative to positive.

Again, no, this is not the case. Conventional current - whether flowing negative or positive, electron flow is just the opposite. Always. You can not have conventional AND electron flow current go the same way. By definition, it was a mistaken guess by Ben when he said current flows from positive to negative. You CAN reverse the current, but that simply means you've reversed the potential voltage polarity too.

An amplifier drives a speaker. Current flows in both directions, just not simultaneously. It does so because the audio source is an AC wave. For sake of ease, assume a sinusoidal wave: Goes positive, then goes negative, then positive again, then negative again - and on and on. When the wave is in its positive phase current (conventional) is said to move from positive to negative. But when it swings into the negative phase current (again conventional) is moving from negative to positive. The real truth behind that is that electrons (electron flow now) moves from the greater source to the lesser source. Same with heat energy, or any energy potential. It always flows from the greater to the lesser. Take for instance static charge: You and I both have a static charge. We shake hands and get a snap. That's because one of us was at a greater potential. The charge equalized the moment we made contact. Exactly which way it went? It went from whomever of us had the higher potential charge. Once equalized we can then pass that charge onto something or someone else. During that brief snap current flows according to Ben from whomever of us had the higher POSITIVE voltage. Whomever was at the lower potential is considered negative with respect to the other more positive charge. While current flowed from whomever was more positive (could also be negative but lets not muddle up the conversation) whomever was more positive sent conventional current (according to Ben) to the other person. During that time electrons passed from one of us to the other. That electron flow was opposite the current.

Ben thought of "Positive" as being similar to a bank account (I'm assuming with some creative license here). If you have a positive balance, versus a negative one, you have money (energy) to spend. But what Ben didn't know back then was that the atom consists of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. The Neutron is the largest particle in the atom. And not all elements have Neutrons. But all have Protons, which are HUGELY more massive than the tiny Electron. If two cars crash into one another, the one with the greater mass will be less affected by the collision. A bike would fare even worse. So, too, is the electron compared to the bicycle. It moves more freely. Therefore, and since it has an orbit it can be knocked out of - it moves.

A battery has a concentration of electrons at its negative pole. Electrons have a negative charge. The positive pole of the battery has an absence of electrons while having an abundance of protons. The electrons want to get back to their normal state, orbiting around a proton. Hence, electron flow is from negative to positive. It was Ben's mistake that gave us the industry standard understanding of conventional current. It's wrong, but it's what we're built upon. So nobody uses electron flow. At least not that I'm aware of.

My advice - know that electron flow is out there, but for the most part, I advise you ignore it.

 

No. It doesn't. As your following comment quoted below says:

Again, no, this is not the case. Conventional current - whether flowing negative or positive, electron flow is just the opposite. Always. You can not have conventional AND electron flow current go the same way. By definition, it was a mistaken guess by Ben when he said current flows from positive to negative. You CAN reverse the current, but that simply means you've reversed the potential voltage polarity too.

An amplifier drives a speaker. Current flows in both directions, just not simultaneously. It does so because the audio source is an AC wave. For sake of ease, assume a sinusoidal wave: Goes positive, then goes negative, then positive again, then negative again - and on and on. When the wave is in its positive phase current (conventional) is said to move from positive to negative. But when it swings into the negative phase current (again conventional) is moving from negative to positive. The real truth behind that is that electrons (electron flow now) moves from the greater source to the lesser source. Same with heat energy, or any energy potential. It always flows from the greater to the lesser. Take for instance static charge: You and I both have a static charge. We shake hands and get a snap. That's because one of us was at a greater potential. The charge equalized the moment we made contact. Exactly which way it went? It went from whomever of us had the higher potential charge. Once equalized we can then pass that charge onto something or someone else. During that brief snap current flows according to Ben from whomever of us had the higher POSITIVE voltage. Whomever was at the lower potential is considered negative with respect to the other more positive charge. While current flowed from whomever was more positive (could also be negative but lets not muddle up the conversation) whomever was more positive sent conventional current (according to Ben) to the other person. During that time electrons passed from one of us to the other. That electron flow was opposite the current.

Ben thought of "Positive" as being similar to a bank account (I'm assuming with some creative license here). If you have a positive balance, versus a negative one, you have money (energy) to spend. But what Ben didn't know back then was that the atom consists of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. The Neutron is the largest particle in the atom. And not all elements have Neutrons. But all have Protons, which are HUGELY more massive than the tiny Electron. If two cars crash into one another, the one with the greater mass will be less affected by the collision. A bike would fare even worse. So, too, is the electron compared to the bicycle. It moves more freely. Therefore, and since it has an orbit it can be knocked out of - it moves.

A battery has a concentration of electrons at its negative pole. Electrons have a negative charge. The positive pole of the battery has an absence of electrons while having an abundance of protons. The electrons want to get back to their normal state, orbiting around a proton. Hence, electron flow is from negative to positive. It was Ben's mistake that gave us the industry standard understanding of conventional current. It's wrong, but it's what we're built upon. So nobody uses electron flow. At least not that I'm aware of.

My advice - know that electron flow is out there, but for the most part, I advise you ignore it.

Okay, I am ignoring electron flow as a convention, but could we not incorporate electrons into conventional current?
You seem to agree that a conventional current could be represented as a positive value one way or a negative value one way. So let’s say we have a current arrow pointing from a to b with a +1A value. You could represent this as -1A from b to a right? And this would not break convention? So assuming conventional current would the electrons physically go from a to b or b to a? I would say b to a because conventional current defined positive current as the movement of positive charge, so negative current would be the movement of negative charge? I am not trying to say that conventional current an electron flow could ever agree as conventions because they are fundamentally opposite. But for those who use conventional current, they can still get positive or negative values. And since the convention defined positive current to flow opposite electrons, did it also not imply then that you could point a conventional current arrow from - to +, the same direction electrons move, and give it a negative value? Because this is equivalent to a positive value from + to -.

Here’s a scenario:
A: 1A from + to -
B: -1A from - to +
C: -1A from + to -
D: 1A from - to +
The way I understand is A and B are one convention (the one we use) and C and D are another (electron flow convention). Therefore in case B you have a conventional current from - to + with a negative value. So electrons would move in the same direction as a negative conventional current?

 

It looks like you are being reasonably consistent in your own use. I think. But good luck getting anyone to agree that phrases like "direction of the negative value for current" are useful or intuitively meaningful.

Taking a quote from you 5 years ago “

I = (N electrons/sec)·(-1.60217657 x 10E-19 coulombs/electron)

NOW you have a current expressed in charge/second and, that current is NEGATIVE in the direction that the electrons are moving.”

This is what I meant in my “final summary” before. You have a current of -#amperes going in a certain direction. Therefore, electrons are moving in that direction. This is what I mean by saying that a negative conventional current is in the same direction as electrons move.Whats the best way to word this? Conventional current vs electron flow = opposite signs for the same exact current. This doesn’t say we can’t represent the movement of electrons using conventional current, it will just have a sign to reflect their charge. Hence, electrons moving in a certain direction is some amount of negative current in that direction. Can we all agree with that per Bahn’s older, very clear comment?

 

I signed off of this many threads ago because it made no sense whatsoever. Therefore this may be my last shot at this.

Stop thinking about the sign of the charge. It is not a requirement in order to understand current flow.

Current is current which represents flow. Flow is usually a positive value. If the flow value has a negative sign then it is going in the reverse direction.

The direction of the arrow tells you nothing about the direction of flow or the sign of the charge carrier.
When we place an arrow to indicate current flow in a circuit it does not indicate the true direction of the current.
The arrow is only used in order to assign the algebraic sign of the variable within the loop and at a node. It does not matter which way we point the arrow. What matters is that we be consistent when we write down the loop and node equations. If the variable turns out to have a negative value it simply means that the initial assumption of the direction of the arrow could have been drawn in the opposite direction if we choose but it is not a requirement in order to correctly analyze the circuit.



Note that in my total description above I made no mention of conventional current or electron current because there is no need to do so.

If you are concerned about it, the only thing you need to know is:

Conventional current flows from positive voltage to less positive voltage, or from +V to -V.
Electron current flows from negative voltage to less negative voltage, or from -V to +V.

 

I signed off of this many threads ago because it made no sense whatsoever. Therefore this may be my last shot at this.

Stop thinking about the sign of the charge. It is not a requirement in order to understand current flow.

Current is current which represents flow. Flow is usually a positive value. If the flow value has a negative sign then it is going in the reverse direction.

The direction of the arrow tells you nothing about the direction of flow or the sign of the charge carrier.
When we place an arrow to indicate current flow in a circuit it does not indicate the true direction of the current.
The arrow is only used in order to assign the algebraic sign of the variable within the loop and at a node. It does not matter which way we point the arrow. What matters is that we be consistent when we write down the loop and node equations. If the variable turns out to have a negative value it simply means that the initial assumption of the direction of the arrow could have been drawn in the opposite direction if we choose but it is not a requirement in order to correctly analyze the circuit.

View attachment 211301

Note that in my total description above I made no mention of conventional current or electron current because there is no need to do so.

If you are concerned about it, the only thing you need to know is:

Conventional current flows from positive voltage to less positive voltage, or from +V to -V.
Electron current flows from negative voltage to less negative voltage, or from -V to +V.

All I was trying to say is if you wanted to, you could use the sign of the current to tell you something about what the charges are doing. Not a complete picture but it would give you some detail. I get that we think of current as being positive and just use the sign to tell us the direction of that flow, but if you wanted to you would not be wrong to make statements about the sign of charges due to the sign of your current, it just doesn’t add much value.

And are you saying that conventional current is a positive value from +V to -V and electron current is a positive value from -V to +V? In other words, having a positive current one way and rewriting is a negative current the other way are within the same convention? This is what I understand to be true from this thread

 

Correct.
Positive value means the flow is in a defined direction.
Negative value means the flow is reversed from the defined direction.

Electron flow is a positive value from -V to +V.
Apply the sign of the charge and the charge flow is consistent with conventional current flow.

 

Correct.
Positive value means the flow is in a defined direction.
Negative value means the flow is reversed from the defined direction.

Electron flow is a positive value from -V to +V.
Apply the sign of the charge and the charge flow is consistent with conventional current flow.

Okay yes so electron flow is a positive value from -V to +V, and electrons themselves are moving from -V to +V, but as Bahn has pointed out this really isn’t a consistent convention because then you will have a positive current pointing into a capacitor plate accumulating negative charge, that just seems contradictory.

However, if you are a conventional using person, as most of us are, you could point your current arrow in the direction from -V to +V, which is in the direction of electrons and thus would have a negative value. Therefore, you would have a negative current pointing into the plate of a capacitor accumulating negative charge, this makes perfect sense. So what I am saying is that conventional current is negative if you point your reference arrow in the direction of electrons, and thus accurately depicts charge flow better in my opinion. Now I know the more traditional statement would be to say that negative current means your flow is in the opposite direction as your assigned flow, but I do not find it to be incorrect in any way to say that a negative conventional current from -V to +V is in the same direction as electrons. It may be stupid, not useful, pointless, or whatever adjective you want to give it; but it is not inherently wrong as it accurately depicts the sign of the charge?

And to my other point, if It is possible to represent conventional current from- to +, which it is, than that means that when someone says current flows from V+ to V-, they are implying a positive value for that current value. Like you said when we think current we are thinking flow, but you could also represent any other flow of positive one way or negative the other, so in the case of current you could also say that conventional current is a negative value from V- to V+. Thus the word current without a sign specified implies everyone is talking about positive.

 

You are being discombobulated by the sign of the flow vector and the sign as a property of the particle.
Ignore the sign of the charge carrier. Instead, say for example, one type of carrier is colored RED and another type is colored BLUE.

RED particles flow from +V to -V.
BLUE particles flow from -V to +V.
Every time a RED particle wants to move, simultaneously a BLUE particle switches place with the RED particle.
The RED particle assumes that it is moving in the positive direction.
The BLUE particle assumes that it is moving in the positive direction.
Because that is the only direction they know how to move, in a positive direction.