A green and clean environment is a human right!
Projects by members => Projects by members => Sebosfato => Topic started by: sebosfato on May 02, 2013, 01:17:56 am
-
I was looking into a book about fusion and found that they use a hydrogen plasma since its the plasma which has the most equilibrated relation between the positive and negative charges possible!
This mean that if you were able to extract electrons from the system it would result in a positively charged gas
I read in this same book that one way to get monoatomic hydrogen or oxygen is by electron attachment dissociation meaning that
H2 + e- = H + H-
or
O2 + e- = O + O-
So i started to think about how many ions would correspond 100 amps as per Meyer's example...
so 100 amps = 100 coulombs per second times 3600seconds = 360,000
This means that 360 thousand ions would need to be formed in one our!
Lets say we get a 1000 engine so it would need at 3000rpm 1500000 liters of "air" per hour...
if at cntp than this mean 22,4liters equals 1 mole of gas molecules... this mean that is possible to calculate the density of ions necessary for getting this amps!
-
http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofMathematicsandPhysics/ampr/tfield/dea.html
Hi Fabio,
Good find!
The questions is in this electron attachment case, on how to do it....
Here is a pdf from nasa which is highly interesting!
-
So most electron sources come from Thermionic sources like:
Low pressure mercury gas discharge lamps.
Like Andersen said: using soft x rays.....
-
Or maybe build your own electron gun :)
See attachment...
-
I was looking into a book about fusion and found that they use a hydrogen plasma since its the plasma which has the most equilibrated relation between the positive and negative charges possible!
This mean that if you were able to extract electrons from the system it would result in a positively charged gas
I read in this same book that one way to get monoatomic hydrogen or oxygen is by electron attachment dissociation meaning that
H2 + e- = H + H-
or
O2 + e- = O + O-
So i started to think about how many ions would correspond 100 amps as per Meyer's example...
so 100 amps = 100 coulombs per second times 3600seconds = 360,000
This means that 360 thousand ions would need to be formed in one our!
Lets say we get a 1000 engine so it would need at 3000rpm 1500000 liters of "air" per hour...
if at cntp than this mean 22,4liters equals 1 mole of gas molecules... this mean that is possible to calculate the density of ions necessary for getting this amps!
does that say 22) 4 litters = 1 mole of gas molecules?
-
So most electron sources come from Thermionic sources like:
Low pressure mercury gas discharge lamps.
Like Andersen said: using soft x rays.....
Herman was saying to get the density required for the combustion chamber he used soft xrays to increase the density(weight) of the gas by a factor of 2 where hydrogen's mass density is 1 into deuterium's mass density (weight) of 2. :) I think another important part of Herman's system is the standing pipe... that thing had some preasure in it... I had to actually glue the lid on mine to keep from leaking gas.
-
http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofMathematicsandPhysics/ampr/tfield/dea.html
The questions is in this electron attachment case, on how to do it....
A steady supply of electrons. ;)
-
I guess the calculation is correct... the avogadro's number is defined acording to this constant of the gases its all related...
22liters and 400mililiters = 1 mole of molecules gas... it can be oxygen, hydrogen, whatever gas...
this mean that if you split 18 grams of water you get 1 mole of hydrogen H2 and 0,5 mole of oxygen O2
33,6liters of gas
I guess the idea of ionizing the oxygen positively for example would imply that the gas is now a charged gas and if its flowing into a tube theres going to be an electric field associated with it...
if it gets into the engine also charged the engine should have and the car is going to have an electric field...
I mean i think that this must be counter balanced maybe by charging the hydrogen with its electrons... If the charge is balanced than equilibrium could be found...
The deal might be that if the oxygen is charged and hydrogen is charged too when oxygen is going to have to form with monoatomic hydrogen and oxygen
Since the nitrogen coming from air is also being charged positively its going to react maybe with the also negatively charged oxygen...
Its meaningless applying high voltage to a steal tube that has gas flowing thru it, just because the electric field inside a tube is 0
The idea than is that only high insulation can help! And probably what is needed is to steal electrons from air and deposit them somehow into hydrogen and oxygen coming out of water...
Maybe could be as easy as having two ionizers one positive and other negative running from the same source of high voltage... and two isolated flow of gases... maybe two hair dryers hahahaha
many ideas not much time here...
-
This is something Ive never told anyone.... James Robey, the guy with Herman Anderson car spent the night at my house several years ago so I could take he and I to a place to get mine and Hermans electrodes replated at the same place (prosumably) that Herman had em done.. well the electrodes... one was diffrent... if you are familar with Hermans design you'll recall a bolt attactched to the center of the electrode for a power connection on one lectrode + it appeared as tho a hole was drilled thru the center of the electrode and the bolt was placed over the outside of the electrode leaving a cyndrillic like open space on the inside of the electrode the diameter of maybe 1", I hope i explained that well enough so anyone interested can get a good mental picture of it.
-
Yes i mean there is going to be high voltage on the car if this electrons are consumed somehow thus there must be some relation to this image:
I mean if the car is an isolated universe, you can't actually steal electrons from a gas that flous if you are not liberating this electrons to another place or the car could end up charged...
this might mean that if monoatomic hydrogen is one of the targets, such as monoatomic oxygen, than ionizing the air positivelly and hydrogen negativelly makes quite sense... the only thing needed is the double gases flow and high voltage...
-
probably the exhaust gases could also be a way to disperse the charge... but probably not
I'm not very familiar with anderson's technology.... but to get soft x rays you need high vacuum i guess.... or an xray tube!
i having many ideas about how the manipulation of this gases could make the gases coming out the electrolyzer ionized maybe negatively. why?
If we use the air ionizer having oxygen flowing thru it nitrogen ... and we are geting this electrons and placing at the negative electrode of the electrolyser maybe the hydrogen generated could become easily monoatomic but as we are applying also a potential difference than this electrons tends to leave the electrode by field ionization, and collide with water....
I'm assuming that a constant flow of air thru the ionizer will create a current but this current is restricted because it charges the electrolyser negatively and stuck there
Anyway the charge must go somewhere, maybe to the output hydrogen and less probably but still the oxygen too...
Maybe a chain reaction can occur
I mean the cathode start electron emission by field action
the current will be a function of the potential applied to the cell to the air gas processor and the flow of gases ....
If this are ions than it makes sense what stan talks about the hydrogen electrical generator... because ions have a magnetic field i guess... at high pressure, high density of ions....
doesn't make sense? to take out something from somewhere you got to put that something elsewhere....
maybe ground could be used too, because it is an endless source of electrons and positive charges too.. .
i guess many sharpy electrodes could be the eec and than it must be
0...
..
-
Lets consider the image below
Well it become very clear that at the right cell it could be water or air, as source of electrons... if water than the electrolysis products should become positively charged...
On the left cell water is used and it receive the negative voltage from the HV source....
I'm guessing that the current measured thru the HV source is dependent on the evolution of gases....
When water evaporates it liberates negative ions if water is properly grounded... if its isolated the negative ions will cease because water became positively charged....
Since in this idea i'm injecting the electrons at the hydrogen electrode, i guess the result will be monoatomic hydrogen.... If a cascade effect occur than other things should be expected...
-
http://www.trifield.com/content/about-air-ions/
means to measure if the gas is coming out ionized could be:
Make the gas pass thru a metalic pipe and measure the voltage of the pipe in relation to ground
Connect the pipe to ground and measure the current
If current is flowing on the high voltage source than this might mean that the gases are going out of water carrying charge....
I guess ground could be used too instead of the flow of air or another water cell,
The air or two isolated systems must be required for moving applications such as a car, since the car must be neutral to be safe
The cathode in the air arrangement could be a hot filament connected to ground... this way the thermal emission would allow for cascading effect if low pressure is used... Maybe not required....
The gases could pass thru two isolated tubes and than electricity could be re generated, i guess
-
So most electron sources come from Thermionic sources like:
Low pressure mercury gas discharge lamps.
Like Andersen said: using soft x rays.....
Herman was saying to get the density required for the combustion chamber he used soft xrays to increase the density(weight) of the gas by a factor of 2 where hydrogen's mass density is 1 into deuterium's mass density (weight) of 2. :) I think another important part of Herman's system is the standing pipe... that thing had some preasure in it... I had to actually glue the lid on mine to keep from leaking gas.
Yes, i remember Herman saying something like that too.
But i couldnot hear what isotope he ment...
If we where able to add electrons to the hydrogen atom, we would get a proton with two electrons in a wider orbit then normal. In my book that means more energy as well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion
-
An EEC is a rather easy device to construct. I had found this novel device some time ago, glad it's still up!
(http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/photo/861/b02/861b0206-a584-4a7d-b9e9-6bfe1def7c64)
-
The idea is not bad but is not possible that it charges the air forever.
The electrons must go somehere otherise it can't function. it will get so negativelly charged that it won't accept electrons anymore
that what i'm trying to think about here... i mean if we charge something the charge must flow to somewhere else... a lamp cant destroy electrons like stan meant...
I guess that f the electrons are added to hydrogen gas electrons into one atom makes of it a negative ion with 1electrons charge and that means pretty not stable, i guess that one thing that happens is that H2 atoms become H monoatomic and its already a great deal.
I guess i got your point steve meyer said that the eletcrons orbit would become larger right?
I mean if they are so unstable than the same electron that splited one molecule can split others as well. the formation of hydrogen molecules generate energy right?
oh boy this is getting good
-
Both the hydrogen and oxygen will be positively charged. Like charges repel, which, in this case allows the two gases to exist in a mixture with very low volatility and yet, when recombined, much more powerful. Who cares where the electrons go, as long as we can keep them off the atoms for a fraction of time. It's if as we are snapping rubber bands... the farther you pull them apart, the stronger the snap back.
-
Bubz
I'm just saying that if you ionize lets say 10 molecules, the electrons you stolen from it is going to make the device highly negatively charged unless it discharge those electrons it gained, or its not going to be able to ionize further molecules. did you got it?
I'm not sure if ionizing hydrogen positively is as easy as to ionize it negatively, i'm going to try to explain that.
If you get one molecule of hydrogen for example 2 proton and 2 electron in a recipient of hydrogen gases, you have a neutral molecule. if you take out one electron from it the molecule should still in a kind of molecular form but the positive hydrogen is going to need to keep proximity to the least electronegative molecule in the recipient... this should be the hydrogen atom just ionized, i'm guessing here that they can share the same electron thereto this electron should travel between the 2 atoms electrospheres...
If instead we add an electron than they are going to dissociate for sure according to the books, but they are not allowed to reform until it loses this electron since there are to electrons in the orbit.... farther like steve pointed
If the oxygen is also filled with electrons it than is not able to form the water molecule i guess... since its going to repel as well...
I'm not saying that this is rather better than ionizing positively.... i'm just talking about to see where it goes.
But the important point is only, where electrons come from and where they go to because in a car you get an isolated system and i guess this is part of the game so i'm trying to think about this. Stan was really smart so he knew about the conservation of charge and i'm sure that he also knew that when you try to separate one ion from its opposite charge source you got to put mechanical work.
-
does this video do anything for you there seb?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqDI0lFz9Gc&list=UUDnCkvXhKbalqOoDV8G29lQ&index=25
-
I think that he is creating bigger molecules there that why he get this vacuum
-
How Electric and Magnetic Fields work in Mass Specs
Electric fields and magnetics field act differently on particles:
Assume we will shoot ions at high speed through a field and separate them: All will have same energy, e.g., 10keV
But this means different velocities because E = 1/2mv2
1. Magnetic Fields Sort Ions according to mass:
Magnetic force = B e v, where B = field, e = charge, v = veloc. So force α veloc.
Compare Hydrogen and Deuterium:
Veloc. of H is 2 times greater (kinetic E = 1/2mv2)
Force on H is 2 times greater
Acceleration (a=F/m), 2 2 times greater (it’s 1/2 the mass)
But, greater v means less time in the field (factor of 2 ) And Displacement α t2, so this means 1/2 the displacement
Net effect: Displacement is 2 greater for H+ than for D+. Conclusion: Ions in a mag. field have circular paths:
m −5 B2r2
e = 4.825 ×10 units of e- charges))
V (B = mag field (Gauss), V = accel. voltage, e is charge (in integer

r2 α kinetic energy α veloc.2
r2 α mass
**Note that an ion with 2 times the mass and a double charge will follow the same path.
2. Electric fields sort ions according to kinetic energy alone:
Force depends on charge alone: Same force for H and D H accel. = 2 D accel.
Time in field: 2 times greater for D than for H But displacement = at2
Therefore: the greater time and slower accel. for D cancel out.
Conclusion: In an electric field, all ions with same velocity/energy take the same path. Electric fields can be used as “energy filters”
r = 2E (r = path radius, E = energy of ions, V = field voltage) Vsector
Utility: Collisions in imperfect vacuum slowed ions (need to filter out)
-
Meyer clearly stated that we can indeed use electric fields to perform work if the amps are restricted but what is the meaning of this.
What if you could use the electric field force to sort ions from the air for example?
I had this idea when i tried to think about a sequential ionizer to get millions of volts applied...
when you consider the electric field lines of force you get that positive ions would go in one direction and negative ones in the other direction, but when they arrive at the electrode nothing impeeds it from discharging...
I mean if you had two metallic electrodes the ions can exchange charges with them and consume power and we don't want that.
For example you get plastic tube in form of T, and there air is forced to get in from the middle, and you put an electric field at both exits, but with an insulated electrode not a metallic only... with that you set up an electric field across both exit of gas, well it seems to me that at one side positive ions only should exit and on the other side negative ions... well if you than pass this charged ions into a metallic tube you could collect their electricity right?
-
is possible to imagine reasons why the idea above could not work... is it possible to get around?
One thing that came to my consideration is:
If we are sorting the ions than the ions will itself create a counter electric field that would cancel the original field such that it should reduce the potential applied.... even if not discharging the plates...
well is that what really should happens?
if we get a (+) -------->---------- (-)
and than (+)---->----(-)---<----(+)----(-)
Well my first impression is that if this is true is possible to keep inputing charge at the electrodes applying a constant potential up to the point where the ions get further apart and virtually separate from each other to a point where their fields are weaker than the applied field...
At this point their charge could be collected somewhere else....
I'm not guessing that they will stick to the electrode since there is flux of air, i could be wrong but would than be possible to rapidly revert the potential at the electrodes by resonant discharge to be able to discharge them at high potential ....
I'm guessing that their thermal agitation could help this separation...
Adding mechanic work to it should even reduce the amount of E field required...thought
What if electrolysis work just like this?
When 1,24v is applied the ions can arrive at the electrode and discharge?
If so this would mean that its all about the potential applied not the electric field. And that the error with electrolysis is that we apply an overpotential to solve a problem creating another....since its a process limited in many levels...
-
Well it seems to act as a capacitor but where the capacitance will be a function of the availability of ions...
So is possible knowing how many ions there are in air at least estimate the potential required to be applied to do something...
If the applied voltage potential amps restricted because its in a plastic insulator for example, when you put charges in it it creates an electric field in the direction of where you took of the charges... but right in the middle ions start to get far away from each other... such that it create a counter electric field... such as to reduce the original field. so it acts just like a dielectric... Of course!!!
than thats the dielectric properties of interest to meyer... i mean how difficult is to separate ions in a dielectric... Water is good to dissolve things because of its High dielectric value, meaning that salt for example when is in water its ions has 81 times less attraction to each other because the electric field is reduced by the water separating the ions. of course there are other factors...
He clearly stated that its all about moving and deflecting charges.. .
Its known that at a certain potential applied he air start to conduct some current meaning its being ionized, there to is possible that meyers properly ionized some air and than provided its mechanical separation by action of the pump and electric fields...
What if you have only one polarity of ions to use?
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/super/life_sciences/E/E-all.pdf
something about E fields physics 3 material
-
Well it seems to act as a capacitor but where the capacitance will be a function of the availability of ions...
So is possible knowing how many ions there are in air at least estimate the potential required to be applied to do something...
If the applied voltage potential amps restricted because its in a plastic insulator for example, when you put charges in it it creates an electric field in the direction of where you took of the charges... but right in the middle ions start to get far away from each other... such that it create a counter electric field... such as to reduce the original field. so it acts just like a dielectric... Of course!!!
than thats the dielectric properties of interest to meyer... i mean how difficult is to separate ions in a dielectric... Water is good to dissolve things because of its High dielectric value, meaning that salt for example when is in water its ions has 81 times less attraction to each other because the electric field is reduced by the water separating the ions. of course there are other factors...
He clearly stated that its all about moving and deflecting charges.. .
Its known that at a certain potential applied he air start to conduct some current meaning its being ionized, there to is possible that meyers properly ionized some air and than provided its mechanical separation by action of the pump and electric fields...
What if you have only one polarity of ions to use?
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/super/life_sciences/E/E-all.pdf
something about E fields physics 3 material
Its supposed to be x ray ions, Seb.....
-
what do you mean with x ray ions?
Im still thinking about it...
what if the isolated electrodes receive a conductive coating and this lends to the ions temporarily a charge such that it gets charged.... when this happens the polarity of the field is reversed by resonant circuit and when the operation is complete it pushes the charge off into a circuit to do useful work...
The fact is such an arrangement would tell if it works like this or if im missing something.
-
I think i found a good geometry for it and it ended up somewhat similar to andrija puharich
haha
I found analysing it that if we don't allow it to exchange charge you do yes work with electric field but you need some mecanic work too because probably there will be a raise in pressure at the exit of the gases... Anyway if we follow what meyer said that work is not conserved than i guess the power this can output is related to the amps it generates... is a current source this mean that if the load is a ohmic the power will be P=Iˆ2*R
from that is possible to understand that is possible to match the load for better power generation (impedance match) by raising the R it increase the power up to some limit...
Lets say if it could generate 100 amps and my resistor is 1 ohm than i would have 100v, 10kw of power... If the resistor is 10 ohm than would be 100kw
think about this design
-
Maybe this is the maxel demon
It may be possible because of the thermal agitation
is it possible to understand the idea from the drawings?
I found this geometry better than the T tube one....
In the end as the ions are not subjected to the separating fields they are exposed to metalic electrodes to discharge their electricity
Is this a nice idea?
-
Well although nobody replies i will putt some ideas here for the record
The idea behind what i'm talking about here is that water, air and other liquid or gas dielectrics have moveable ions in it due to cosmic rays and nuclear decay in their environment.... I think thats what Paul brown discovered with his atomic cells
the reason why we cannot see their actions is that the ions + and - are aways very close to each other by action of a force F=q*E where E is a function of the distance between the ions. given by E= K *Qsource / rˆ2
Therefore the greater the distance the greater is the force between the ions, but if considered to be in a dielectric medium the dielectric will reduce this force.
Anyway voltage is defined as the work necessary to bring charges together. So if we apply lets say 10000v to a cell consisting of two isolating materials of 2mm each and we get a 4mm gap of air we get than, 6600v across the air and the voltage across the plastic if is consdered as factor 3dielectric than it becomes 3300 across the plastic and i mean is really easy to go up to and beyond 100kv if necessary... The only problematic is that it must have highly insulated transformer
With a flyback for example...
One thing that i considered is that if the charges can move they will develop a high voltage backwards across the medium itself such as to counter act the applied charge potential. Reducing the potential by the same amount since its charges can move and its not a ˜polarization˜ concept anymore. Thereto when this potential is developed it will suck more juice from the transformer since (the capacitance increases ) since the vic acts as charge pump( voltage multiplication during pulse off) Than the volts applied is not related to turns relation only but there is a magnification factor. For example you get a 50/1 turns factor and input 12v in the primary the volts output is 600v but during pulse off if the field is allowed to collapse fast the voltage output can be as high as 30kv if using a 600v mosfet to pulse the transformer.
When we apply an E field than there is a force making the ions to be separated if the electric field of the particles is of smaller strength.
If a weak E field is applied nothing should happen at all. We would only polarize rotationally the ions... Their everywhere...
We can imagine this as a guitar string if we start to make it more tensioned than it stretches up to the point it splits apart..
So if we would need to use only mechanic work to separate those ions we would only be able to extract from them the same energy we give to them but if we apply an electrostatic field and make all the integrals the result is positive energy done by the electric field in separating the ions in such manner that the force of attraction between them is dramatically reduced, so they are separated with no to little mechanic force by simply geometric arrangement of dielectrics ... I found that this could be incremented by having an electric field in each duct of ions making it self pump effect.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaics
http://www.rexresearch.com/nucell/nucell.htm
The end result is that the potential difference provides no net input; it only provides a constant voltage, while the radioactive source acts as a constant current generator. The ground state E0 is a constant and the energy out E3 is equal to the energy in less the ionization energy E1 and the losses, L1 and L2. Then the energy balance is:
E0 = EB - E1 - E3 - L1 -L2
This suggests that the junction has as low an ionization potential as possible.
In conclusion, it can be shown that the introduction of ions from any source into an electric field will generate electricity in accordance with well known physical and chemical principles and may be satisfactorily explained in terms commonly used in describing a Voltaic cell The energy does not come from the ions themselves, but rather from the work done to generate ions.
Neither the electric field, the electrode or the medium between the electrodes contribute any energy in the Voltaic Effect. The energy is contributed by the ion generator; whether this mechanism is chemical, electromagnetic or nuclear is irrelevant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_battery
Direct charging generators
In the first type, the primary generator consists of a capacitor which is charged by the current of charged particles from a radioactive layer deposited on one of the electrodes. Spacing can be either vacuum or dielectric. Negatively charged beta particles or positively charged alpha particles, positrons or fission fragments may be utilized. Although this form of nuclear-electric generator dates back to 1913, few applications have been found in the past for the extremely low currents and inconveniently high voltages provided by direct charging generators. Oscillator/transformer systems are employed to reduce the voltages, then rectifiers are used to transform the AC power back to direct current.
English physicist H.G.J. Moseley constructed the first of these. Moseley’s apparatus consisted of a glass globe silvered on the inside with a radium emitter mounted on the tip of a wire at the center. The charged particles from the radium created a flow of electricity as they moved quickly from the radium to the inside surface of the sphere. As late as 1945 the Moseley model guided other efforts to build experimental batteries generating electricity from the emissions of radioactive elements.
[edit]Betavoltaics
Main article: Betavoltaics
Betavoltaics are generators of electrical current, in effect a form of battery, which use energy from a radioactive source emitting beta particles (electrons). A common source used is the hydrogen isotope, tritium. Unlike most nuclear power sources, which use nuclear radiation to generate heat, which then generates electricity (thermoelectric and thermionic sources), betavoltaics use a non-thermal conversion process, using a semiconductor p-n junction.
Betavoltaics are particularly well-suited to low-power electrical applications where long life of the energy source is needed, such as implantable medical devices or military and space applications.
-
In conclusion, it can be shown that the introduction of ions from any source into an electric field will generate electricity in accordance with well known physical and chemical principles and may be satisfactorily explained in terms commonly used in describing a Voltaic cell The energy does not come from the ions themselves, but rather from the work done to generate ions.
Neither the electric field, the electrode or the medium between the electrodes contribute any energy in the Voltaic Effect. The energy is contributed by the ion generator; whether this mechanism is chemical, electromagnetic or nuclear is irrelevant.
PAUL BROWN
Well meyer said the same thing in other words kind of encrypted
What if we use the water as the electron source?
If we put a B+ there and we make the electrons to flow we got what, electrical energy!
-
This tell me two things !
That meyer indeed restricted the amps But he fooled all thinkin that the chokes restricted the amps and second that he used those vics to generate the high voltage needed to accomplish what i'm explaining and than his EEC was actually the mean for liberating the water ions as Gas while generating electricity... of course than if he provide a way to (consume electrons in this fashion he could clearly than obtain positive charged gas output
-
the reason is very simple charge distribution
Ok if he had a resistive choke he could cancel the induced voltage with the resistive voltage to sum up to zero at a point.. but shold it work?
-
I'm thinking about using candles parafin and pvc tubes because its cheap just for a trial test
I think the best aproach anyay could be high dielectric constants ..
-
I think that i understood a manner to ionize the air but restricting the current... Its very simple! i'm thinking about the reason for the fact that at 30kv in a van de graf a current start to flow because of corona discharge. So if you think about the reason why it happen is simply because the electric fields act on the air ionizing it but as the electrode is metal it steal one electron from the air for example consuming power and giving the air a positive charge. So if you simply cover the van de graf with wax its not going to be able to conduct electricity but the electric field is going to still there so as the ions separated around it, and van de graph will keep charging to higher voltage... for example.
In the case of the EEC the important is to understand that charge conservation must hold true. So if you think the problem it seems really that the electric field does indeed work separating the ions, and the work required to generate the ions comes from background radiation and self-ionization processes.
-
if it works like you say then all positive ions will go to low electric potential area , same for negative charges and this will restrict the flow of electricity through the medium because there wont be enough negative charge carriers on one side but you need very high voltage in order to do it or else charges will not redistribute .. I havent really understanded your thinking so I may just say stupid things.. ahhaha that's what the internet is for.
-
I see your point... is should be this way if it were a static condition. There to the charges create a screening effect that reduce the electric field...
In my idea, not only its being constantly step charging, but also its being driven by the pump that mechanically (physically) separate the ions. The thing is that if you analyze it, than you see that the ions separation is being performed by the electric fields mostly...
-
thoughts:
If we apply an electric field a dielectric will act to reduce the electric field proportional to the dielectric constant.
So if we had vacuum and applied 81kv and the electrodes were 1mm apart than there was originally 81MV/mm E field. if we inser water there between than we get 1kv for a constant charge in the electrodes.
The problem with water and metal electrodes is that this are able to exchange electrons with the ions present in water therefore they get discharged in expense of generating H2 and O2 by electrolysis.
So if we find a situation where the voltage drops more than the 81 times being it water for example, than something else might be happening... The reason is that a dielectric should not conduct electrons nor ions at all. So real world is different than ideal world we are used to learn at university... The reason water is not a good dielectric when it has metal electrodes immersed into it is that it consume energy by letting the electric field do work while by letting amps transfer ( not able to restrict the flow of amps...
I'm not sure but probably is possible to test it with a multimeter and map the function of the electric field around the electrodes....
-
Earlier in this thread i posted that may have reduced my credibility hahaha
stated that the farther the ions are from each other the greater is the force of attraction ... well i don't know where i was with my head that night
actually the farther they are the weaker is the field and it decreases with the square of the distance... so Once the ions get separated from each other it won't take too much work to separate them further...
is it correct now?
F=k*q*Q/dˆ2
E=F/q= Q*k/dˆ2
I think i was confusing with electric potential and sincerely i way too tired these times...
-
Potential energy can be defined as the capacity for doing work which arises from position or configuration. In the electrical case, a charge will exert a force on any other charge and potential energy arises from any collection of charges. For example, if a positive charge Q is fixed at some point in space, any other positive charge which is brought close to it will experience a repulsive force and will therefore have potential energy. The potential energy of a test charge q in the vicinity of this source charge will be:
where k is Coulomb's constant.(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/imgele/elpe1.gif)
SUPOSE two positive charges are than very close together than their repulsion force is big and they have the greatest potential energy possible//
(http://regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys03/apotdif/charwork.gif)
if they are allowed to move they will move to increase the distance thereto reducing the force and the potential since they should separate until it reach infinity than its potential energy reduces if the distance increases but what about opposite charges + - ?
The closer they are the greater is the attraction force...
(http://regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys03/apotdif/potwork.gif)
-
In this example the amount of work done by the person is 30J, this is also the amount of electrical potential energy that is possessed by all three charges together. The electrical potential (not energy) is the amount of energy per unit of charge.
(http://regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys03/apotdif/calc.gif)
At the original position of the charges they have no energy, so they also have no electrical potential or 0 volts. Once they are pulled apart, they have have an electrical potential of 10 volts. We could say that the electrical potential difference from one point to the other is 10 volts.
Keep in mind that the electrical potential describes the amount of energy per unit of charge. This means that when one of the charges is released, the electric field will do 10 Joules of work on the charge so it will have a kinetic energy of 10 Joules the instant before it strikes the negative charge.
-
Earlier in this thread i posted that may have reduced my credibility hahaha
stated that the farther the ions are from each other the greater is the force of attraction ... well i don't know where i was with my head that night
actually the farther they are the weaker is the field and it decreases with the square of the distance... so Once the ions get separated from each other it won't take too much work to separate them further...
is it correct now?
F=k*q*Q/dˆ2
E=F/q= Q*k/dˆ2
I think i was confusing with electric potential and sincerely i way too tired these times...
I was soo confused...... :)
-
F=k*q*Q/dˆ2 if the result is positive the force is repelling if negative (opposite charges) its attractive force
E=F/q= Q*k/dˆ2 This is electric field (vector) of a point charge so the farther from the point charge the weaker is the field..
U=kqQ/d this is the potential energy if the charges are positive their potential is greater when they are the closest together such that the potential at infinite is zero....
V= (kQ/d1)-(kQ/d2) this is the electric potential if d2 is set to infinite the right side turns to zero and so the V=kQ/d
If there are two charges you need both to know the potential energy between them and it can be summed because its a scalar quantity
k=1/4*pi*Epsilon0
if C=Q/v than C=Q/Q/4*pi*epsilon*d= 4*pi*epsilon*r (self capacitance of a point charge or sphere where the r is the radius)
-
the 14 equation at meyer tech brief is wrong
the voltage potential due to a charge q at a distance d where the dielectric constant of the medium is Er actually is V=q/4*Pi*epsilon*Er*d
I think he shows this equation to let us conclude that the electric potential reduces by the dielectric constant factor
of course if there are two point charges at a distance d than the potential will double...
is all this correct?
-
C=Q/V , dielectrics are also used to increase capacitance by reducing voltage *. Also electric flow Φ=int(E*ds)=q/ε0 (gaussian surfaces). Potential is a scalar and electric field a vector and if there are more point charges V=k(q1/r1+q2/r2) so yes all correct.
voltage is decreased because electric field is decreased*