-This was very helpful, but I still don't see why I am wrong to SEE the following:
If you need UPS trucks to take the widgets to the factory, then until said widgets are unloaded off the truck at the factory dock they should labeled as one. when the factory shipper/receiver calls UPS for information on the widgets the dispatch will tell him " the truck is 30 min. away " never once did the dispatcher mention the widgets or even felt the need to because between the dispatcher and the shipper they both UNDERSTOOD that the truck and the widgets at that point were the " same " thing, not like they were fused together or anything but it's like, if the truck is on the way, so is the cargo.
Same with the OP, if electrons are the only carrier of - charge in the wire, which is the only charge that the load uses as force to do work, then ELECTRON FLOW should be labeled as the only ELECTRICAL ENERGY FLOW in wire.

No analogy can be pushed to far, but it still holds here. Sure, you can talk about "the truck" as being thirty minutes out or you can talk about "500 widgets" being here in thirty minutes. But that doesn't make "a truck" the same as "500 widgets" any more than "a barrel" is the same thing as the oil it contains. They merely have a fixed conversion factor between them -- 500 widgets per truck, 42 gallons of oil per barrel, -1.602E-19 coulombs per electron.

 

This may be helpful or not. But, I find their is some awesome data free and available on this site if you wish.

voltage - current
Conventional vs Electron Flow

kv

That last one sounds okay on the surface (I haven't read it is super detail), but the very next page has him making the exact same mistake and treating electrons as if they have positive charge and not making any of the other adjustments needed to keep the system consistent.

 

No analogy can be pushed to far, but it still holds here. Sure, you can talk about "the truck" as being thirty minutes out or you can talk about "500 widgets" being here in thirty minutes. But that doesn't make "a truck" the same as "500 widgets" any more than "a barrel" is the same thing as the oil it contains. They merely have a fixed conversion factor between them -- 500 widgets per truck, 42 gallons of oil per barrel, -1.602E-19 coulombs per electron.

- " Sure, you can talk about "the truck" as being thirty minutes out or you can talk about "500 widgets" being here in thirty minutes. "
-Sure.

" But that doesn't make "a truck" the same as "500 widgets" any more than "a barrel" is the same thing as the oil it contains. "
I agree.

 

So why would me voting " true " on the thread poll be wrong.

 

Hello again,

Very often in physics as well as math and other subjects we talk in the most general way, then when an application comes along we start to get less general in order to actually solve a real world problem.

A simple example is:
y=m*x+b

That's a very general statement about a straight line. But then comes along an application, say Ohm's Law for pure resistance, and then the 'b' becomes zero so we are left with:
y=m*x

and of course now the variables take on meaning and represent what they should in Ohm's Law: E=R*I

So we went from very general, which had nothing to do with Ohm's Law for pure resistance if the 'b' was non zero, to a less general form which made 'b' equal to zero. But now that equation does not apply to a general straight line anymore because a straight line can have an offset and thus where it crosses the y axis it is non zero.

Under the topic of discussing charges, we often talk of negative AND positive charges in order to cover all the bases, just like the equation for the straight line covered all straight lines not just when b=0. So if we say positive charge and negative charge, it's usually because we dont want to leave anything out, not because we must have those charges present all the time.

In the case of the wire, we have both positive and negative charges, but the negative charges outnumber the positive charges. When we say negative charges we mean electrons, or better yet the quasi-electrons, and when we talk about positive charges we talk about stationary atoms that are missing one outer shell electron so their net charge is positive. The positive charges do not move, but they may appear to move if we could actually observe down to that level. That's because if we look at the one-electron-at-a-time model we'll see the hole that the missing electron makes change location. Even though it is not exactly the same exact hole that is moving it appears that it does from a distance.

- I understand. But that only happens in semi-conductors not a wire, am I wrong.

The simplest analogy i think is to look at a pipe filled end to end with ball bearings, but missing just one at the far left end. That's a 'hole'. Now first the ball next to the hole moves left into the hole, and that fills the hole but the next position to the right now has the hole. Next the 2nd to last ball moves into the hole, and that means the 3rd position has the hole. So already we see the balls moving right to left but the hole 'appears' to be moving left to right. Now bring the two ends of the pipe together to form a complete circular path, and that is like the circuit.
But this isnt the most general rule. The more general rule is in free space where charges can move any way we want them to in order to show their behavior.

-By free space, do mean not a wire and INSIDE a vacuum.

In free space, we can say we have a negative charge moving from right to left, and we have a positive charge moving from left to right. It doesnt matter where these charges came from or how they got there because we specify them ourselves so that we can talk about what happens next and what the overall outcome is. This is where we get positive charges moving and negative charges moving. And since the direction is part of the understanding of current, we include the direction.

Given the free space environment, if we have a positive charge moving left to right and a negative charge moving left to right then the total charge that has moved past that point is zero. There are other cases which i mentioned already.

-I don't know, maybe my i'm reading your post wrong, but I just wasn't able to understand.

 

Hello again,

If you re-read the posts you'll see that the context wasnt about whether or not positive charges were flowing in a wire anyway. It was simply about the view that either positive charges were flowing (theoretically) or negative charges were flowing.
In conventional current flow we think of a positive charge moving through the wire, even though there may be none. In electron flow, we think of a negative charge moving through the wire. But we dont care that much when we say that a positive charge moving to the right is the same as a negative charge moving to the left. This is something you should think about independently. In other words, in theory it still works to think of positive charges instead of negative charges. That's all that was about. It had nothing to do with proving or disproving that positive charges actually move. It just states that regardless how we think of it, the outcome is the same, and if you think about it if you insert an ammeter into the circuit it's not going to change it's reading just because we switch from conventional flow to electron flow. That would be nuts

What else you might want to do is look up the definition of majority and minority carriers.

 

So why would me voting " true " on the thread poll be wrong.

I have no idea, since it isn't.

 

It just states that regardless how we think of it, the outcome is the same, and if you think about it if you insert an ammeter into the circuit it's not going to change it's reading just because we switch from conventional flow to electron flow. That would be nuts

If you insert the same ammeter into the circuit, then it will read the same. But if we were to decide to redefine the electron so that it's charge was positive, we would have to make all new ammeters and voltmeters so that they read the opposite polarity that they do today -- and it's important to note that we would have to change all of the voltmeters as well as the ammeters. We could also make and use batteries the same way we do now, but we would have to change the polarities of the terminals. The current notation and labeling is a direct consequence of assigning a negative charge to the electron, regardless of how that assignment came about.

 

I have no idea, since it isn't.

- I'm going to go medium off-topic here and ask some thing be fore I vote.
How is it the positive proton charge current " flows " from an AC power source through wire with out a carrier. I know that AC is alternating electric energy current of - and + charge, but then that would mean that electrons can and do carry a positive charge(from the proton) with them in AC through the wire. Am I wrong.

 

Hello again,



If you re-read the posts you'll see that the context wasnt about whether or not positive charges were flowing in a wire anyway. It was simply about the view that either positive charges were flowing (theoretically) or negative charges were flowing.
In conventional current flow we think of a positive charge moving through the wire, even though there may be none. In electron flow, we think of a negative charge moving through the wire. But we dont care that much when we say that a positive charge moving to the right is the same as a negative charge moving to the left. This is something you should think about independently. In other words, in theory it still works to think of positive charges instead of negative charges. That's all that was about. It had nothing to do with proving or disproving that positive charges actually move. It just states that regardless how we think of it, the outcome is the same, and if you think about it if you insert an ammeter into the circuit it's not going to change it's reading just because we switch from conventional flow to electron flow. That would be nuts

What else you might want to do is look up the definition of majority and minority carriers.

-Your probably right, my mistake.

 

That's all great but it's not germane to the simple question of is the superset of ELECTRIC conventional current only restricted to the physical movements of the ELECTRON current subset. The answer to that is clearly no.

Electric current is a flow of electric charge. Charge can be positive (protons) or negative (electrons), and conventional current is not wrong or backwards.

Maybe we should understand how the water analogy creates the appearance that electric current should be in the direction of the physical charge carrier flow because the water analogy easily leads to the belief that the energy of the circuit must be flowing in the electrons kinetic energy round the wire, dropped off at the load and then back round to be filled up again.

Re: "Electric current is a flow of electric charge. Charge can be positive (protons) or negative (electrons), and conventional current is not wrong or backwards."

Kind of misleading. Yes the positive charge is due to protons but the protons do not move.
For every electron that moves from negative to positive it fills a hole (positive charge) and leaves a hole behind. So as electrons (negative charges) go from negative to positive, positive charges (holes) effectively go from positive to negative.
In the early years of electricity we imagined electricity as positive charges and this is still with us in chemistry and solid state electronics. We really can't have one without the other.

 

In the early years of electricity we imagined electricity as positive charges and this is still with us in chemistry and solid state electronics. We really can't have one without the other.

True, and it wasn't a problem to the pioneers of electricity in discovering almost all the principles of electromagnetics before the electron was even discovered by J. J. Thomson using those early electrical equations.

What should we call it when we are shocked by High Voltage? No electrons flow though your body. What we have are Na+ ions, K+ ions, Cl- ions, many misc ions and no electrons but we always call it a current and even have long threads about 'is it the voltage or current that kills'.

Conventional current is not the opposite of electron current.

In other media, any stream of charged objects may constitute an electric current. To provide a definition of current that is independent of the type of charge carriers flowing, conventional current is defined to flow in the same direction as positive charges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current#Conduction_mechanisms_in_various_media

 

If you insert the same ammeter into the circuit, then it will read the same. But if we were to decide to redefine the electron so that it's charge was positive, we would have to make all new ammeters and voltmeters so that they read the opposite polarity that they do today -- and it's important to note that we would have to change all of the voltmeters as well as the ammeters. We could also make and use batteries the same way we do now, but we would have to change the polarities of the terminals. The current notation and labeling is a direct consequence of assigning a negative charge to the electron, regardless of how that assignment came about.

Hi again,

Not sure what you are getting at here. That's because for one no matter HOW you define the electron, it's still going to read the same on ANY (reasonable) ammeter. You can define it as a pigeon egg if you wish, but dont expect your next current reading with your trusty ammeter to be changing it's mind about if the current should be X amperes or it should be how it wants to cook breakfast in the following morning

Seriously though, if we define the electron as negative and read 10 amperes, then if we change our minds and define it as positive we will still read 10 amperes.
The fact i am getting at is that our theory does not dictate how nature must act. It's the other way around, and we dont even have that right yet in all fields. So i am thinking you must have had another point there which i would like to hear more about if you care to share. TIA.

 

Hi again,

Not sure what you are getting at here. That's because for one no matter HOW you define the electron, it's still going to read the same on ANY (reasonable) ammeter. You can define it as a pigeon egg if you wish, but dont expect your next current reading with your trusty ammeter to be changing it's mind about if the current should be X amperes or it should be how it wants to cook breakfast in the following morning

Seriously though, if we define the electron as negative and read 10 amperes, then if we change our minds and define it as positive we will still read 10 amperes.
The fact i am getting at is that our theory does not dictate how nature must act. It's the other way around, and we dont even have that right yet in all fields. So i am thinking you must have had another point there which i would like to hear more about if you care to share. TIA.

- " if we define the electron as negative and read 10 amperes, then if we change our minds and define it as positive we will still read 10 amperes. "

Is this because the ammeter will measure current (electric current) as how many electrons are flowing right through the clamp at that moment regardless of the charge it carries at that moment.

 

- I'm going to go medium off-topic here and ask some thing be fore I vote.
How is it the positive proton charge current " flows " from an AC power source through wire with out a carrier. I know that AC is alternating electric energy current of - and + charge, but then that would mean that electrons can and do carry a positive charge(from the proton) with them in AC through the wire. Am I wrong.

Who says that positive proton charge current flows in a wire? It's the electrons that move. No one, except you, keeps trying to claim otherwise.

 

True, and it wasn't a problem to the pioneers of electricity in discovering almost all the principles of electromagnetics before the electron was even discovered by J. J. Thomson using those early electrical equations.

What should we call it when we are shocked by High Voltage? No electrons flow though your body. What we have are Na+ ions, K+ ions, Cl- ions, many misc ions and no electrons but we always call it a current and even have long threads about 'is it the voltage or current that kills'.

Conventional current is not the opposite of electron current.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current#Conduction_mechanisms_in_various_media

- "
Conventional current is not the opposite of electron current.

conventional current is defined to flow in the same direction as positive charges
"
why is it when I read the first sentence and then the second I seems like i'm trying to opposite statements.
I could swear that when I read the first sentence it's like i'm reading the statement " blue is blue " and the second one like i'm reading the statement " blue is red " and they are both coming from the same source, which means it's an error, or I don't know how to read. what am I missing.

 

Who says that positive proton charge current flows in a wire? It's the electrons that move. No one, except you, keeps trying to claim otherwise.

- what am I suppose to think when I read this

" Since current can be the flow of either positive or negative charges, "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current

 

Hi again,

Not sure what you are getting at here. That's because for one no matter HOW you define the electron, it's still going to read the same on ANY (reasonable) ammeter. You can define it as a pigeon egg if you wish, but dont expect your next current reading with your trusty ammeter to be changing it's mind about if the current should be X amperes or it should be how it wants to cook breakfast in the following morning

Seriously though, if we define the electron as negative and read 10 amperes, then if we change our minds and define it as positive we will still read 10 amperes.
The fact i am getting at is that our theory does not dictate how nature must act. It's the other way around, and we dont even have that right yet in all fields. So i am thinking you must have had another point there which i would like to hear more about if you care to share. TIA.

Read what I wrote. I said, "If you insert the same ammeter into the circuit, then it will read the same."

But all ammeters and voltmeters built AFTER the change (assuming they conform to the new definition of the electron's charge) would be built so that they would read the opposite.

Let's imagine that we change the definition of a meter such that it is twice as long as it is now (but we keep all other units of distance defined as they presently are, which is in terms of the meter). The speedometer in a car that has already been built will read the same when we are traveling down the highway at the same speed that we did yesterday. The notion of "the same speed" hasn't changed -- if it took us an hour to travel between two points on the road yesterday, then at the same speed it still takes us an hour to travel between those same points. The meaning of "speed" is independent of how we measure it. But the measurement we get is very much dependent on the definition of the unit involved. New meter sticks would be twice as long and there would only be half as many meters between the two points on that highway, so speedometers in new cars built after the change in definition would indicate a speed that is numerically one half of the value as speedometers in the old cars.

One way to keep track of things is to call the new definition of the meter "newMeters". You could do the same with a change in definition of the charge on an electron from negative to positive and call the new units newAmpers and newVolts. What you would find is that 1 newAmp = -1 amp and 1 newVolt = -1 volt.

 

- what am I suppose to think when I read this

" Since current can be the flow of either positive or negative charges, "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current

In general, electric current could physically be due to the flow of positive charge carriers, negative charge carries, are changing electric fields. But YOU keep wanting to limit the discussion to electrical current in a typical wire. Under THAT restriction, electric current is physically due to the movement of electrons (that carry a negative charge).

 

Hello again,

I think the main crux of the thread, because we are talking about a wire and not really free space or anything else like electrolytes, is that the MAJORITY carrier in a wire is the electron, and the minority carrier is the hole. In a simplified example, say we had 99 electrons and one hole circulating around the wire. What can that one hole do compared to the 99 electrons? Note much. It can help to cancel the effect of ONE electron. The other 98 will perform work.
If you have 99 people pushing a cart with some friction in the wheels to the right and one pushing to the left, which of those people will be performing work? The 98 that are to the left of the cart pushing it to the right. That one person pushing to the right gets canceled by the effect of that one person pushing to the left, because their forces are equal and opposite. Those two can not perform work. If they were the only two present, the cart would not move.