How Electricity Actually Works

Things like this are why Audiogon  forums are required reading at all top universities offering Electrical Engineering degrees. 

electric signal travels through the conductor approximately 5c i.e. 5 speeds of light.

     Unless they've majorly updated the EE textbooks, since my days of higher learning: those taking such courses are still being instructed on how folks thought electricity worked in the 1800s.

     Of course: when you're only interested in (basically) making things work, those old theories, laws and measurement practices are fine.

     It was interesting, comparing what was taught and lectured upon, between the Physics and EE Depts, regarding electricity, at Case.

     Made for quite a few interesting discussions between course participants.

     Our discussions weren't quite as animated as those at the 1927 Solvay Conference, I suppose, BUT: there was still a contingent (like here, on AudiogoN), that wanted the universe (and electricity) to always make sense.    Of course, it's been widely/scientifically proven: it seldom does.

I'm glad I'm retiring. Electrical Engineering degrees. I dug ditches and laid pipe. Water runs down hill. OK, You got a degree in plumbing. Oh and keep your hands out of your mouth. How many engineers does it take to wire a new house?

I got a question. Why 50 or 60 hz and why 220-230, 100vac, 120vac, and why AC and DC? Isn't most solar DC? Maybe Edison was right. Water still runs down hill though.

@pingstonsmile -

       YES: a solar generated current is ALWAYS DC.  That’s why there are INVERTERS.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-integration-inverters-and-grid-services-basics#:~:text=What%20are%20Inverters%3F,which%20the%20electrical%20grid%20uses.

                                Isn’t most solar DC?

Sounds like some are down on engineers. Maybe find some better ones? I bet they understand electricity as well as free forum members.  Maybe better. 

Am I imagining it, or does pingstonsmile sound a lot like oldhvymec? 

You’re not imagining it

Roger Skoff spoke of something like this in this article. Not quite the same but...

I watched the first video quite a while ago. This one was great as well!

The initial video put a lot out there that needs to be out there. It was one of the first things widely available, which I could agree with on the subject in quite a while that can actually help push understanding forward.

This video was even better! "Good Job"!

But until we begin to admit the faults enshrined in so many of our contemporary accepted texts? We are still just holding footraces "uphill" in the sand dunes. And that is just hard to do. It wears people out.

Too slow we move.

But thanks again, "GOOD JOB"!

This does have implications for our audio cabling...

 

What implication would that be?

I reall found the video fascinating. Did I understand all of it? Of course not!

If @pingstonsmile eccuses excuses himself to go feed the chickens, we’ll know for sure. 😁

As one of the few people here that has the education necessary to understand the video, I still fail to see significant application to audiophile sound. 

I will say that the understanding of basic electricity is surprisingly low on this forum and many members would benefit from a better understanding but this isn't it.

Jerry

carlsbad, it's that way on every forum I've been a member of. We have a generation or more that has been taught that any thought that enters their head is valid. I was a member of a gun forum for years. There were people that owned blued pistols who stripped the bluing off so that they'd look like the stainless pistols that others owned. Both shiny silver, right? Uhm, no. Hey, at least here no one has shot themselves yet, knock on wood.

@builder3 I expect most here are from an older generation but who have equally invalid reasons for believing what they think is correct.

electric signal travels through the conductor approximately 5c i.e. 5 speeds of light.

@czarivey 

What is the carrier through the conductor at such a high speed?

 Not electrons...

Not electric charge... 

b

@deludedaudiophile 

My take-away as far as audio goes is that proximity of cabling to each other matters.  This is well known and I don't think it is even arguable at this stage of the game.

Regards,

barts

@builder3 I'd say that there are a lot of affluent people here...seems there is a low positive correlation between detailed technical knowledge and fiscal success.

Thanks for clarifying that. 

It is a problem when you are taught the analogy of plumbing where; water flows through pipes, just as electricity flows through wires , if they are made of copper, in this case. (That was a nice touch in the Cal Tech experiment.) It completely screws up the individuals understanding when learning about electronics in depth, and there have been tons of posts here where knowledge of the true nature of electric current flow would benefit the people posting them and help them understand other posts as well.

That brings up my point. The fields that exist in a stereo system are many, and they do interact with one and other at many different points in the system, think components stacked on one and other, very bad to have the power amp directly on top of the preamp; big transformer, big powerful field. But this would reinforce peoples arguments that separates sound better than integrated, would it not?

But, as Amir points out on his board and YT videos, most of these fields are negligible from a performance and auditory standpoint. Simply beyond the range of human hearing. Probably a good idea to have more MuMetal on the inside of every electric component though, especially an integrated amp.

My question is this: Does this explain why twisting speaker cable seems to be the first rule of improving speaker wire performance? (Oddly enough, sort of like DNA strands.) In other words; if you took those cables that go off into outer space and return and twist them, still maintaining the distance between the two, does that intensify the field between the two parallel wires and help isolate them from outside field interference?

Thanks for all the hard work and sharing it.

I thought I knew something but learned I only believed what I was taught that got the job done but not in anyway how it was actually happening. The field, that makes complete sense as I have read some great books and watched some excellent videos on the the subject. I still believe there is far too much snake oil in the cable industry and will continue to make my own cheap great cables from designs I have learned directly from some dang fine audio engineers or well accepted designs easy enough to find with a simple search.

 I will also look at some of the higher end cables a bit differently now and understand some just want the best they can find(in reality or perceived reality) and will spend what it takes, even if there are minuscule differences to be gained, or not. I have spent $15k on coilovers(shocks and springs combined), $10k on brakes, $5k on a differential.....when 20% of those costs would of netted 95%, or higher of the same results.

Thanks for posting the video, most fun thing I have watched in quite some time:)

Rick

I’ve been in the electrical field since 1979 dealing with controls and power distribution. Do I need to replace all my Fluke test epuipment?🤓

I like your post william53b, especially the comment about DNA strands:)

deludedaudiophile

169 posts

05-01-2022 at 07:29am 

This does have implications for our audio cabling...

 

What implication would that be?

Most obvious is why the dielectric, insulation, used to cover the bare conductor on ICs and speaker cables can effect the sound. Example Teflon vs cheap PVC. 

Going even deeper it may also explain why the geometry build of a cable can have an impact on the sound of a cable.  Move the discussion from the signal energy traveling in the conductor  to traveling outside the conductor through the dielectric  in the form of an EM, electromagnetic, wave traveling in one direction from the source to the load at near the speed of light in a vacuum. Note the EM wave is not confined in the dielectric... It extends beyond the insulation. What effect does cable geometry have on the signal EM wave?  What effect does shielding have on the signal EM wave?

.

Oops! "Preamp on top of the power amp." Although from a heat dissipation standpoint I guess that could make sense, but I have certainly never seen them stacked that way. 🙄

Most obvious is why the dielectric, insulation, used to cover the bare conductor on ICs and speaker cables can effect the sound. Example Teflon vs cheap PVC. Going even deeper it may also explain why the geometry build of a cable can have an impact on the sound of a cable.

Can does not mean does in a fashion that can detected by human hearing. Everything can have an effect. Fortunately all these things are well understood by many, are easily modelled, and can be related directly back to electrical signal levels. That should be sufficient to make an accurate estimate if humans are able to detect the change.

Good reason to use coaxial cable.

@deludedaudiophile said:

Good reason to use coaxial cable

Glad you mentioned coaxial cables. Great example for the discussion of this thread.

Here is how an AC signal travels in a coax cable. Note the signal does not flow in the center conductor. Note the signal does not travel back and forth from the source to the load. Rather it travels in one direction from the source to the load outside the center conductor through the insulation, dielectric.

Example: Power flow in a coaxial cable

Fortunately at the frequencies of concern for analog audio and our wire length field, signal propogation is not a concern though audiophiles get themselves worked up easily. For digital cables it is important but something figured out long ago.

I ordered a kite, some string, and a key off of Ebay last week.  

I'll let you know how it turns out.

Ha ha ha ha ha....

He is just so "deluded"!

Frequencies of concern?

How about, "Field interactions"? All of those pesky stray particles from simply wave diffraction. Particle Scatter from wave beaming crosstalk? Crosstalk from inductive winding archetypes. "Especially" with the common symmetry wire topologies so prevalent today and for those for absolutely no good reason. And so many, many more variables for affectation!

Correct "Signal Propagation" with integrity is ALWAYS a concern. "If it is not? You may have chosen the wrong hobby.

No matter the length, cross section or material mix used. The source signals integrity at endpoint is going to vary from its original form. Everything affects this. And always in a negative manner differing from the original form. And of course, "Every length, of every, single, (wire, bar or plate), in, on or even near, any and all parts, pieces and systems"? It turns out that ALL of that, just happens to be actual, "attenuating devices"! YUP, working, "antenna's"! Because if it is conductive, it has a polarity. If it has a polarity, it is broadcasting. If it is broadcasting, it is also receiving- "Noise/Distortions/Resonance" and more! And since all geometrically definable, "space" is not only surrounded by, but also just "Chock Full" of energy "in an insane amount of mass per unit of area". And mass equals what??

And that of course |IS| at it's core just another vibration. Which causes an oscillation....

I'll stop now, since I am sure everyone here see's where I am going with this...But why?

Ok, so you forgot about a variable or two. "So What" you say?

Any (one) variable listed above can be made to cause a terminal fault in any system. 

Now take them all. And account for them all in any given system. (As best you can). "This does not need to be perfect. Just your best work". In ANY given system.

Now;

Are you "Really" going to try to argue that there would not be any appreciable change in that systems functionality, if a full accounting and then following that a correction was applied?

That is all I am attempting to get you to see. But that should be enough!

Correct "Signal Propagation" with integrity is ALWAYS a concern. "If it is not? You may have chosen the wrong hobby.

I have chosen an advanced degree in solid state physics and a career in semiconductors and batteries. You may want to pick someone else to chant your voodoo perceptions of how electric fields work.

Are you "Really" going to try to argue that there would not be any appreciable change in that systems functionality, if a full accounting and then following that a correction was applied?

 

I most certainly am. We are discussing audio and human beings. Everything you mentioned can be reduced to simple parameters that can be used to evaluate performance at audio frequencies and the distances involved. 

We build nanometer scale semiconductor devices now. Billions of transistors on a chip. We make nanometer scale materials and membranes for batteries that change the chemical and electrical interactions on that same scale. Do you really think we don't understand electricity and materials well enough to understand with sufficient detail wire for analog audio?

Strange how my speakers measure and sound extremely well. No hiss or hum my ear within an inch of the tweeter or mid yet my power cable and balanced cable run parallel, even strapped together with velcro for a distance. The way some think here nothing should work or I should be getting nothing but distortion. My cables are generic nothing expensive or special about them maybe that's the reason everything works and sounds great? 

pingstonsmile, there is a YouTube channel called Kathy Loves Physics & History that goes into such things as why most of the world uses 50 Hz 220V and the US and some others use 60 Hz 120V.

All of it is very interesting and she is writing a book on it all...and how it all came about since the early days of electricity. 

@jea48 

In all of the books of electronics and electrical engineering, the electric signal through the conductor is the ordered motion of electrons

I think it’s great he made that video and got people like me thinking, even though it was a little misleading. In his follow up video he makes it clear that the bulb will by no means come on full strength right away, and that the early effect will still occur even if the circuit is open somewhere way out there in space. Once that was made clear I was reminded of when I first learned about transformers, how they could transfer power without any direct physical connection between the conductors. I was amazed at that, but also disappointed that they tended to be noisy and inefficient.

On another controversial claim seen in a YouTube video, the notion that you can make a wind powered car that can go down wind faster than the wind still messes with my head.

On another controversial claim seen in a YouTube video, the notion that you can make a wind powered car that can go down wind faster than the wind still messes with my head.

My understanding is there are two effective forces, one is the wind pushing, but the other, less obvious, is the wind "pulling"  (though still pushing). Sail boats can also go much faster than the wind.

I didn't spend a lot of time looking at this, but appears to be Bernoulli force, just like an airplane. The wind travels faster over the sail, which causes low pressure, so you have additional force acting on the sail which makes the boat go faster.

In the ground car, the low pressure is created by the propeller. The wind does not spin the propeller, it moves the car whose wheels are connected to the propeller causing it to spin.

czarivey

4,837 posts

05-02-2022 at 11:37am

@jea48

In all of the books of electronics and electrical engineering, the electric signal through the conductor is the ordered motion of electrons

@czarivey

This guy wrote a few books too...

Here’s an article he wrote a few years ago.

What is Electronics - Ralph Morrison

Here is an excerpt from the article:

Storing or moving energy.

There is a common misconception that signals are carried in conductors. Somehow this association crosses over to the idea that conductors carry both signals and energy. A few simple calculations can show that this is a false idea. Consider a 50-ohm transmission line carrying a 5-volt logic signal. The initial current at switch closure is 500 mA. A typical trace is a a gram-mole of copper that has 6 x 10²³ copper atoms (Avogadro’s number). Each atom can contribute one electron to current flow. Knowing the charge on an electron makes it easy to show that the average electron velocity for 500 mA is a few centimeters per second. What is even more interesting is that only a trillion electrons are involved in this current flow. This means that only one electron in a trillion carries the current. This also says that the magnetic field that moves energy is not located in the conductors. The only explanation that makes sense is that energy in the magnetic field must be located in the space between two conductors. Conductors end up directing energy flow - not carrying the energy.

Here is another article written by the Late Ralph Morrison:

As for going faster than the wind...this is another one that academicians love to state purposely vaguely to make you think they are cleverer than they are.  Your vector downwind can never be faster than the wind.  In fact it must be quite a bit less  than the wind. but if you go at a 45 degree angle to the wind, your forward velocith is 1.414 x your wind vector velocity.  So in a 12 mph wind with a 10mph velocity in the windward direction, your forward velocith with be 14.14 mph.  No there is not special bernouli equation that causes you to go faster than the wind, just like the lighting of the lightbult, even just a little bit, cannot happen faster than the speed of light.   --Jerry

@carlsbad 

Are you seriously telling scientists who have researched this, modelled it, simulated it, and know all the forces in detail of how this works, that they are wrong?

The "car" they made goes in exactly the same direction as the wind and goes 2.5 times faster than the wind. They are going down-wind at 2.5 times the wind speed.

The bernoulli forces are similar to a plane. Faster moving air is lower pressure. They create a low pressure so that the air on the opposite side pushes towards the low pressure area.

@deludedaudiophile Well, I’m a physicist so no, I’m not saying physicists are wrong. I’ll saying that some laypeople trying to understand physics haven’t gotten it yet.

BTW, I do know bernoulli’s equation. It is what makes a plane fly, it isn’t a magic equation that causes a sail to push the winds.

Good luck. Hope you find that physics teaching gig you’re looking for.

Jerry

PS  Here is another physics demonstration you should appreciate, a ramp that shoots a ball higher than the ball was at the start.  

@carlsbad ,

BTW, I do know bernoulli’s equation. It is what makes a plane fly, it isn’t a magic equation that causes a sail to push the winds.

No luck needed. I have taught physics. At the university level. Technically I was just the TA, but I essentially taught a few courses.

Perhaps you need to read less and criticize more?

In the faster than wind car (in the direction of wind), the rotating propeller provides the speed differential between the car and the wind hence generating thrust beyond the speed of the wind.

And here, before you teach your next class, the physics of sailing.

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2883908

p.s. I will take that apology at any time.

@deludedaudiophile I suggest you step away from the keyboard and go sleep off whatever you're drinking.  You're embarassing yourself.  Like how you messed up your attempted slam of me.

I hadn't seen the physics today article but want to compliment them in saying exactly what I posted above.  perhaps you didn't read what I wrote, or perhaps you don't understand the vector math explanation that i gave.  

But I'll be honest now. Give up on physics and find another job.  You need money to buy audio equipment.

Jerry

The Vector math explanation YOU gave is wrong. They definitely did not say what you said. The vector has effect, but that is it. It does not define the speed. It is akin to angle of attack. However, the primary force is Bernoulli effect. To that end, the shape of the sail has a large effect as it forms the wing. Trade-off losses versus lift for maximum speed for given hull drag at a given speed. Having a hard time believing you are a physicist since you don’t seem to have understood the article and certainly not to any level of nuance.

Anyone who reads that article, even laypeople, will see that you are wrong.

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2883908

Moving air has kinetic energy that can, through its interaction with the sails, be used to propel a sailboat. Like airplane wings, sails exploit Bernoulli’s principle. An airplane wing is designed to cause the air moving over its top to move faster than the air moving along its undersurface. That results in lower pressure above the wing than below it. The pressure difference generates the lift provided by the wing.

The wind is doing two things,” said Margot Gerritsen, an engineering professor at Stanford. “It’s pushing, but there’s also a part of this wind that is dragging. That dragging is done with this force called lift."

“Lift,” in the case of a sailboat, doesn’t mean “up” although it does in the case of an airplane. In fact, the physics that allow an airplane to fly are the same physics that allow a sailboat to travel faster than the wind. The difference is that airplanes lift up off the ground, and sailboats lift parallel to the ground— as if they’re flying sideways.

deludedaudiophile "The Vector math explanation YOU gave is wrong. They definitely did not say what you said. The vector has effect, but that is it. It does not define the speed. It is akin to angle of attack. However, the primary force is Bernoulli effect.

This is false and in error and reflects a misunderstanding of the physics involved perhaps the cause of which is you’re overestimation of the knowledge you claim to have attained from pursuing you’re advanced degrees and experience in battery sales.

You will need to go back and work the math while consulting more advanced physics reference materials and perhaps the assistance of an experienced physicist.

@clearthink ,

I have a PhD (yes really -  feel free to test me) in solid-state physics, have worked extensively in semiconductor processing. I am now a technical director for one of the largest battery companies on the planet.

Feel free to share your qualifications that you feel are so extensive that you believe your insults were warranted.

I have refrained from stating my full qualifications as for the most part, they are not relevant. I also have never felt the need to ask anyone else their qualifications here. I based my opinions on the quality of their posts.

I suggest dialing back the insults and dialing up dealing with what has been posted in the thread. Everyone will benefit.

I can tell I’ve gotten to the end of this thread. Disappointing, really, to witness what was a fairly edifying discussion devolve into childish ‘mine is bigger than yours.’

@oldrooney -

     If you think this thread devolved, read through this one, from some months back:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/to-fuse-or-not-to-fuse-that-is-the-question 

     Amusing at first, then: began to swirl down, as though around the event horizon of a gigantic, cosmic toilet.

     The moderators threatened to shut it down, at one point, it got so nasty.

     At times: this site reminds me of the TV Soaps.    One can stop watching for years, come back and it seems nothing has changed (or- been missed).

@deludedaudiophile , and @czarivey 

Your thoughts...

Understanding Electricity and Circuits: What the Text Books ...

.