OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'

[nul-points]

What holds the polarization of the dielectric?  What force keeps the material stressed?

I know it is not electrons on the plates because I can remove the plates and replace them with other plates and the energy is still stored in the dielectric.  Most dielectrics will not hold a state of compression so spare me the mechanical explanation if you think of it.

There is something very subtle going on in a dielectric.

yes, indeed


here's a supporting quote, from Aspden:

"...my physics master introduced us to the properties of a Leyden jar by demonstrating an experiment with two concentric electrodes and a removable cylindrical dielectric spacer element. He charged the assembly as a capacitor and then removed the dielectric element before (I believe - if my memory serves me well) then connecting the electrodes to discharge any energy they might have. Then he reassembled the capacitor with its dielectric spacer element and showed us that the capacitor did, indeed, still have some electric charge. His message was that there was energy stored in that dielectric spacer element..."


...and a different take on the same experiment, from Beaty:

"Whenever you take apart a Leyden jar or other high voltage capacitor, there is a corona effect which makes very strange things occur. When you electrify a Leyden jar, and then you pull the inner metal cylinder out of the jar, the capacitance value drops, and this makes the potential difference skyrocket to enormous levels. The potential tries to become huge but it cannot, because instead it creates corona along the metal edges, and and it leaks the excess charge into the air. This corona allows the opposite electrical charges to "paint" themselves onto both sides of the dielectric "jar" surface. So, if you pull a leyden jar apart, the sharp edges of the metal plates sweep along and transfer a large percentage of the separated charges from the metal plates to the glass surfaces. The energy is still there! It's still stored as a field in the dielectric, but those separated charges are not on the mental plates anymore. Instead they are now TRAPPED ON THE GLASS SURFACE! Strange idea, huh? A capacitor with no plates, just a dielectric"

all the best
s.

[poynt99]

An electret:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electret

.99

[Grumpy]

Thanks.  Those answers are interesting, but don't answer the question.

What holds the polarization of the dielectric?  What force keeps the material stressed?

If the dielectric consists of "dipole molecules" - what "dipole molecule" is in a vacuum capacitor?

If the energy stored in the dielctirc is stored by a stretching and/or alignement of the dipole molecules of the dielectric, then what force keeps these dipole aligned?  It's not a "charge" on the plates as the plates only serve to deliever the energy and to recover it.

What if their is something else within the space between the plates of a capacitor either along with or in place of the material dielectric?  What role would this entity play in capacitance?

[nul-points]

Thanks.  Those answers are interesting, but don't answer the question.

yes, the two links i gave were intended to show that Aspden and Beaty arrived at opposing views from the same experimental results


Aspden, relying on memory of a physics demonstration early in his life, assumed that the mechanism of energy storage was at least partly due to an inherent property of the dielectric

Beaty however, presumably with the benefit of the decades of experimentation which have occurred since Aspden's encounter with the experiment, is now able to state that the energy transfers from plate to dielectric (in this particular experiment) resulting from a corona discharge as the dielectric is removed from between the plates

eg. do the experiment in oil, or at lower voltage tension and the effect (energy stored by the dielectric) doesn't happen

the neat twist to Beaty's account is that finally the energy from the corona discharge does get stored by the dielectric - but on it's surface


Poynt's mention of electret gives an interesting comparison with 'standard' capacitor action - impose a dipole stress across a material which is usually a good insulator, whilst enabling alignment mobility of its constituent charge-elements and then 'lock-down' the mobility again to store the resultant dipole - even after the external influence is removed (albeit at reduced strength)

if this alignment of internal dipoles is a close-relative of what's happening in a conventional cap containing a dielectric - and also in a cap where the dielectric is replaced by a vacuum - it begs the question "what is acting as the dielectric in the case of the vacuum cap?", as you say

the answer for me is some kind of aetheric medium which forms the basis of all manifestations of energy (incl matter) - the effect of which can be concentrated both for capacitive action, eg by dielectrics - and  for inductive action, eg by ferro-magnetic materials

so, from an aetheric point of view, an electret is like an 'embalmed' capacitor - and a magnet is like an 'embalmed' inductor

all the best
s.

[Grumpy]

the answer for me is some kind of aetheric medium which forms the basis of all manifestations of energy (incl matter) - the effect of which can be concentrated both for capacitive action, eg by dielectrics - and  for inductive action, eg by ferro-magnetic materials

Exactly. 

This being the case, how might it be exploited?

Can we incorporate additional strain the the "medium" by prepolarizing it?  For example, if we made a cylindrical capacitor consiting of a tube within a tube, not rolled, and magnetized the space it occupies by wrapping a toroidal coil around the two tubes - or make a plate cap with a magentic field perpendiculat to the side of the cap - can we increase our return?  You may notice that this arrangement is similar to the "Wilson Effect" in which a plate cap is charged by moving the dielectric between the plates perpendicular to a magnetic field.

(I just read over an extensive experiment performed by a Professor L. T. More around 1905 to ascertain if a dieletric indeed changes dimensions when poalrized and the result was a definite "NO".)