The Secrets Of Back EMF

[Jimboot]

The idea of positive ion flow is not that hard to understand.  I am old enough that i learned electron flow at an early age.  About 60 years ago.  To understand positive ion flow just arrange a row of marbles across a Chinese checker board with a gap in the marbles.  The marbles represent the electrons. The gap represents a positive ion. Now take the marble that is to the left of the gap.  Move it to the right into the gap.  Now where did the hole go?  As you move each marble from the left of the gap into the gap the "electrons" are moving left to right but the holes are moving right to left.  In reality only the " electrons"  are moving but it appears the positive " ions" are also moving.  The whole idea of positive ions should be restricted to chemistry and ignored in electronics.  The positive ion theory only confuses those new to electronics.


Respectfully,
Carroll

Everything about electron flow confuses me. Especially after looking at experiments when using an electron beam dismisses the theory of flow and explains the mechanism as spin. Which intuitively makes more sense to me. Regarding the subject of this topic I'm building Transverse Flux Generators/Motors to explore the negation of lenz in this arrangement.

[tinman]

Everything about electron flow confuses me. Especially after looking at experiments when using an electron beam dismisses the theory of flow and explains the mechanism as spin. Which intuitively makes more sense to me. Regarding the subject of this topic I'm building Transverse Flux Generators/Motors to explore the negation of lenz in this arrangement.

I wonder if an EMF would be produced in the coil if you drilled a hole in the center of the core pieces, and passed the wire through the holes, instead of having the coil sitting in the C part of the core pieces.

Never came across these Transverse Flux Generators/Motors before. should be interesting to see the outcome.

[onepower]

Citfa

The idea of positive ion flow is not that hard to understand.  I am old enough that i learned electron flow at an early age.

I was also taught conventional flow notation(charge/hole theory) in Engineering but found the concept backwards so I transitioned to electron flow notation. I understand both forms of notation however my point was that conventional (+) flow is not technically correct.

For example, an electron flow/hydraulic analogy describes a back emf perfectly.
On charge (-)push>>>inductor>>>pull(+)
On discharge (+)pull>>>inductor>>>push(-)
It works because the charge density corresponds to pressure and the difference in pressure drives the flow of charges from high to low.

Now let's try it with conventional (+) notation.
On charge pull(+)>>>inductor>>>push(-)
On discharge push(-)>>>inductor>>>pull(+)

It doesn't work because it would falsely presume that the positive (+) charges are moving when in fact they cannot.
Since the (+) charges cannot move it's like saying a hydraulic ram works by removing the oil (-) on the low
side of the piston and sucking in air(+) on the high side. It's not technically correct and it never will be.

People can believe whatever they want however if it has no basis in reality then it's not going to work in reality. It's that simple...

AC

[onepower]

Jimboot

Everything about electron flow confuses me. Especially after looking at experiments when using an electron beam dismisses the theory of flow and explains the mechanism as spin. Which intuitively makes more sense to me.

This is because most people don't understand energy or electrodynamics.

Think of it this way, if we connect a wire across a battery the electrons do not trickle through it like a stream. Think of a slice or thin cross section of the wire containing millions of electrons drifting forward from the (-) towards the (+) terminal. In effect, each slice is like a thin charged capacitor plate full of millions of electrons inching forward. Each thin slice has an electric field which acts on the slice next to it like millions of thin charged capacitor plates. This is why the electron flow can be very slow but the electric field and energy travel very fast.

Suppose I charge a 12" sphere to tens of thousands of volts and start moving it towards you. The sphere only needs to move a small amount but you feel the effects all over your body. Your not feeling the sphere your feeling the force of the much larger electric field radiating from the sphere all over. It doesn't matter if the sphere spins or not because the electric field does not spin with it anymore than light spins with a light bulb. Now line up a thousand charged spheres and move the first one closer to the rest. The first sphere can move slowly but the electric field displacement moves down the line of spheres near the speed of light. This is basically how electron flow in a conductor works.

Psychology also comes into play and people get confused when many effects occur all at once. The mind always looks for the easy answer, the silver bullet but has trouble comprehending a barrage of bullets. So you say flow is problematic but spin makes more sense, why not both?. Why not flow/displacement, scattering/oscillations as well as spin and EM waves in between the moving electrons(-) also interacting with the stationary protons(+)?. Theoretically all these effects should come into play and all describe what happens in a conductor which carries an electron current.

AC

[seychelles]

MAYBE OUT OF CONTEXT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKQRqPlFMII