directional cables?

Herman, So, which way do the cables point?

We've been over that. Most with any experience in the matter agree that it depends on the design of the cable and how the manufacturer decide to label his cables.

You insist it is signal flow dependent just like others insist electrons are flowing like water. Both ideas are wrong but you are free to believe what you wish.

Just out for a troll today?

.

Herman

The moniker contains the word simply, it was not an insult any more than referring to Mr. Romgard is.

My apologies. I thought you had previously used "Simply" and then switched to "Simple" in the post I was replying to. I see now that you had used "Simple" previously.

Because the electrons do not flow in a power distribution system.

Yes, they do. There would be no power distributed if they did not.

They do not flow along the wire like water flows in a hose.

They do indeed.

That is a simple analogy used to try and get people with very limited knowledge of the topic at hand to get some sort of visual picture so they might better understand, but it breaks down.

It's a perfectly adequate analogy at the macroscopic level.

Visualize this.

Sure.

AC voltage at 60 Hz reverses polarity every 8 milliseconds.

Yes.

In the electron flow = electric charge flow = water flow model the electrons would have to flow first in one direction and then in the other.

Yes. Which is precisely what they do under AC conditions. If they didn't, your loudspeakers wouldn't work properly. The drivers' cones would only be able to move forward from their point of equilibrium. But of course they don't. The move both forward and backward from their point of equilibrium. That's because the current, and subsequently the electrons flowing through the voice coil is reversing direction, which changes the polarity of the magnetic field established in the voice coil which is what causes them to work in the first place.

They would flow close to .7 the speed of light down the wire for 8 mS and then all turn around and flow back the other way for 8 mS and so on. A given electron would travel about a thousand miles and back 60 times a second. (186,000 m/s * .7 * .008)

No. They do not flow close to .7 the speed of light.

This is where your understanding is breaking down.

You're confusing electron drift velocity with the velocity of propagation of the electromagnetic wave. It's the latter which will propagate at nearly the speed of light.

Electron drift velocity is typically very slow (on the order of centimeters per second) and depends on how much current is flowing and how many electrons are available for conduction.

Imagine a line of 100 people all pressed up against each other front to back. Then give a push to the person at the back of the line. The energy "wave" of that push will propagate along that line of people much faster than any individual is moving.

It's much the same here. The electromagnetic wave propagates at a very high velocity, but the drift velocity of the electrons is very low.

Ok, one more, in your model electrons are flowing back and forth, however, in real life the energy is flowing continuously in one direction, power plant to your house. How can the charge carriers (electrons) be traveling back and forth when the charges are all going in one direction?

Because the charges aren't all going in one direction. At least not in an AC power distribution system. The charges are alternately moving back and forth.

Do me a favor and google "electric current" and read through several of the definitions. They all say it is the flow of charge, nowhere does it say it is the flow of electrons.

Thanks, but I've been studying physics and electronics long before the was Google.

You're not understanding something very fundamental here. And that is, in this context, you can't separate "charge" from "electron." Electrons are negatively charged particles. And in a piece of metal wire, it is the electrons which are the charge carriers. Therefore the flow of charge means a flow of electrons. Can't have one without the other.

Sure, electric current is ultimately broadly defined and can stem from flow of things other than negatively charged electrons, such as ions which which may be positive or negative, but we're not talking about any of that. We're talking about current flow in metal wires such as those in audio cables.

I'm done. If you still insist that it is the flow of electrons then that will help you understand some of the basic principles so that is a good thing.

I'm afraid you're the one who needs to come up to speed on some of the basic principles.

You can start here:

Electric Current.

If you have any questions about it, just ask.

I thought my post yesterday reconciled the different points of view here, with two of the protagonists expressing agreement, and the other one not expressing any disagreement.

Guess I was wrong, although I don't quite understand why.

Best regards,
-- Al

Hey Al, here is the problem.

As you realize, In a DC circuit the energy flows very fast from source to load and the electrons drift very slowly around the circuit. In an AC circuit the energy also travels very fast from source to load while the electrons vibrate back and forth, they do not drift. Despite these facts Mr. Q insists that they are flowing along the wire in an AC circuit. I think the confusion may arise from the term alternating current and thinking that current, like a river, is something that must flow.

Reading back through my posts I admit I could have been clearer in my explanations. I have the sneaky suspicion that Mr Q understands this better than he explains it too, but insisting that electrons flow from the power plant to the house like water flows from the pump station to the house makes it hard to come to common ground (no pun intended.)

Thanks for your input.

.