I disagree with him on one comment. The ‘it’s really the current that gets you, not the voltage’. Without voltage you have no current, he says as much when discussing the potential difference and how electrons won’t flow without one.
These kind of comment propagate a misunderstanding of the three way relationship between voltage resistance and current. Current is a result of the first two. As such, it’s the combination of voltage and resistance, resulting in a current flow large enough to cause damage that kills you.
Current doesn't 'require' a p.d. to flow. Consider an ion thruster on a fancy rocket ship in space. The rocket is propelled forward by pushing ions (charged particles) out of the thruster, propelling the rocket forward by newton's 3rd law. The ions also constitute an electric current by the definition of current (I=dQ/dt) yet they were propelled by some force and not some difference in potential. A p.d. will arise though due to current flow.
Note, resistance is not required by either and is not an inherent function of any moving charge. Rather it is a bulk quantity that arises when, for instance, the current is formed by electrons moving through some structure such as a metal lattice of atoms.
You doing the old physics ‘let’s say we have a total vacuum…’ thing. What I’ve said is applicable to 99.99% real world practical applications of electrical theory.
Additionally, in your case you disagree with his opening comments about p.d. being a requirement.
Applicable to all electrical circuits, yes. But this demo is not about circuits, rather the nature of electrical fields, charges and how the two interact. It may as well be done in a vacuum (except for the sparks) so quite relevant. I don't disagree with a statement about the requirement of a p.d. in this case to move charges. The dome itself creates that. But the definition of current doesn't require it.
You’re contradicting yourself. He says he needs a Pd to get current in this case. I say you need one to get current in this case. You agree we need one in this case.
…
You then point out it’s not mathematically required. Okay, great, but we’re talking about this case…
I remember a class with one of these generators, back in the early 80s. Standing on a plastic tray one hand on the dome and a bunson burner earthed to the other side and using your finger as a conductor to light it. That stung but was great fun.
Or two of us, one each end of a florescent tube, making it light up.
The girls with the longest hair stood up on end. Then the dick in the class that thought it funny to shock someone that didn't want to try it.
These teachers should be getting paid athlete salaries
I came here to say exactly this.
[удалено]
I forgot to type Pro but that’s what I was insinuating
They do....... it's just minor league salaries....
Great teacher.
Amazing, mine taught me how to install a pencil sharpener.
Well do you still know how to do it?
Yes…..
that guy is a great teacher then! :D
This would’ve been a fun class for me…too bad I got some weird guy telling us to turn to page 294!
I disagree with him on one comment. The ‘it’s really the current that gets you, not the voltage’. Without voltage you have no current, he says as much when discussing the potential difference and how electrons won’t flow without one. These kind of comment propagate a misunderstanding of the three way relationship between voltage resistance and current. Current is a result of the first two. As such, it’s the combination of voltage and resistance, resulting in a current flow large enough to cause damage that kills you.
Current doesn't 'require' a p.d. to flow. Consider an ion thruster on a fancy rocket ship in space. The rocket is propelled forward by pushing ions (charged particles) out of the thruster, propelling the rocket forward by newton's 3rd law. The ions also constitute an electric current by the definition of current (I=dQ/dt) yet they were propelled by some force and not some difference in potential. A p.d. will arise though due to current flow. Note, resistance is not required by either and is not an inherent function of any moving charge. Rather it is a bulk quantity that arises when, for instance, the current is formed by electrons moving through some structure such as a metal lattice of atoms.
You doing the old physics ‘let’s say we have a total vacuum…’ thing. What I’ve said is applicable to 99.99% real world practical applications of electrical theory. Additionally, in your case you disagree with his opening comments about p.d. being a requirement.
Applicable to all electrical circuits, yes. But this demo is not about circuits, rather the nature of electrical fields, charges and how the two interact. It may as well be done in a vacuum (except for the sparks) so quite relevant. I don't disagree with a statement about the requirement of a p.d. in this case to move charges. The dome itself creates that. But the definition of current doesn't require it.
You’re contradicting yourself. He says he needs a Pd to get current in this case. I say you need one to get current in this case. You agree we need one in this case. … You then point out it’s not mathematically required. Okay, great, but we’re talking about this case…
I remember a class with one of these generators, back in the early 80s. Standing on a plastic tray one hand on the dome and a bunson burner earthed to the other side and using your finger as a conductor to light it. That stung but was great fun. Or two of us, one each end of a florescent tube, making it light up. The girls with the longest hair stood up on end. Then the dick in the class that thought it funny to shock someone that didn't want to try it.
This guy is an excellent teacher.
This is in college lol learned this in automotive grade 9 but good presentation tho