Conventional current flow VS Electron current flow

[Dave45]

I think this needs to be discussed as it leads to deception in circuit analysis at least where an inductor is concerned.
Lets look at a simple circuit from both views
The conventional view sees current flowing from pos to neg as shown in the first pic,  it would appear that the current flows through the inductor then when the current is shut off the spike continues on.
This would seem as though the inductor is resisting change in current flow and the spike is an effort of the inductor to resist that change.
It would look like femf, you see no polarity change in the spike.

[Dave45]

Now lets Look at electron flow as it should be, from neg to pos
Now you can see that the spike that looked like femf in the convention view is actually bemf and it runs through the diode in the opposite direction as the current flow.
This backward direction through the diode is an indicator of the polarity of the backspike, the backspike has a pos polarity.

[Dave45]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8y_fKEAMWw

[allcanadian]

@Dave45

I have used electron flow notation exclusively for over 10 years and can say that everything makes much more sense and personally I find conventional current flow notation completely absurd.

For instance if a conventional current is said to flow from positive to negative and the only charges which can actually move in the conductor are the free electrons which have a negative charge then that would mean the negative electrons must be "flowing" to the negative terminal which is a problem. You see like charges repel so why would the negative electrons be flowing to the negative terminal which repels them from the positive terminal which is attracting them?.

Let's do a thought experiment, I attach a lightbulb to a battery and conventional current flow notation say's electrons flow from positive to negative. First the negative terminal has an abundance of electrons and the positive terminal an equal and opposite lack of electrons. So why are the electrons flowing from the positive terminal with less electrons attracting the free electrons to a negative terminal with an abundance of electrons repelling the free electrons?. Lol, it is without a doubt the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of and contradicts damn near every know law of science.

The fact that this is still being debated in this day and age is a little disturbing in my opinion.

AC

[forest]

Now lets Look at electron flow as it should be, from neg to pos
Now you can see that the spike that looked like femf in the convention view is actually bemf and it runs through the diode in the opposite direction as the current flow.
This backward direction through the diode is an indicator of the polarity of the backspike, the backspike has a pos polarity.

Please explain what is the reason for spike ? I see the problem here : first electrons flow when switch is closed through the diode, toward positive terminal. I imagine they are slowed down and partially stuck inside coils windings and when switch is off they cannot move back via diode , so they should move forward to the positive terminal causing voltage rise ? Hmm...looks like things are not as simple as seen on picture. I thing electrons interact with own magnetic field and this collapsing magnetic field is allowing them to move faster on "switch off" stage. Faster move means current rise and voltage rise is the following result.
What do you think ?