Timeline for What *exactly* is electrical current, voltage, and resistance?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
35 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2022 at 15:27 | answer | added | J Thomas | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 23, 2019 at 21:44 | comment | added | Helen | @Addison mainly Eric's. The reason is that the comments nitpick about the definition of "definition" and of "analogy". | |
| May 6, 2019 at 12:56 | vote | accept | Addison | ||
| May 1, 2019 at 12:01 | comment | added | Addison | @Helen which one you talking about? | |
| May 1, 2019 at 11:57 | comment | added | Helen | ...We really need a way to downvote comments... | |
| May 1, 2019 at 11:30 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| Apr 26, 2019 at 9:39 | answer | added | EHM | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 25, 2019 at 9:11 | answer | added | Peter - Reinstate Monica | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 25, 2019 at 3:59 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Apr 25, 2019 at 6:27 | |||||
| Apr 24, 2019 at 11:40 | answer | added | Manvendra Somvanshi | timeline score: 6 | |
| Apr 24, 2019 at 8:39 | answer | added | Neil_UK | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 24, 2019 at 8:38 | comment | added | Szabolcs | "the 'exact definition' should apply to all of them and make sense" It does apply to all of them. The equations describing the flow of a liquid in a network of thing pipes are exactly the same as those for electric circuits. "I can't really work with a vague analogy that kind of applies and kind of doesn't." Change of attitude needed. Physicists were working with circuits well before the microscopic mechanisms of current transmission were understood. (Those mechanisms are not simple and are well beyond the high-school level physics you're talking about here.) | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 23:15 | comment | added | Eric Lippert | All descriptions are some form of "it's sorta similar to". Thinking of electrons as individual things like lego bricks that have a property called "charge" is just another "it's sorta similar to". Then you go down a few more levels and start thinking of electrons as "excitations of a field", whatever that means, and that's just another "it's sorta similar to". There's no getting away from analogies; there's only more or less exact analogies. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 21:59 | comment | added | JoL | @sbecker To further nitpick: I think you mean, "And the more water travels per unit of time, the higher the 'current'". Ampere is Coulombs per second. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 20:48 | answer | added | Bill N | timeline score: 10 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 20:12 | history | edited | Addison | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Included a note about my definition of an 'exact definition'
|
| Apr 23, 2019 at 20:10 | comment | added | Addison | @EricLippert I see what you mean, my intention was to convey that I want a more solid answer than an analogy. Something that had no 'buts' or 'sometimes applies' or 'is sort of similar to'. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 20:08 | comment | added | Eric Lippert | Your question is unclear because you ask for an "exact definition" but do not give an example of an "exact definition". Let's consider your plumbing analogy. Can you give me an "exact definition" of what it means for water to move through a pipe at a certain velocity, if I didn't understand what "velocity" or "mass" were? By understanding what counts as an "exact definition" in your mind, we can better give you an "exact definition" of the behaviour of charge in a conductor. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 16:16 | answer | added | Tapi | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 15:53 | answer | added | Artelius | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 14:58 | comment | added | JimmyB | See also electronics.stackexchange.com/a/415516/6383 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 13:24 | answer | added | alephzero | timeline score: 14 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 13:22 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | Possible duplicate: Could someone intuitively explain to me Ohm's law? | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 11:03 | comment | added | sbecker | Just a minor nitpick: "And the faster the water travels, the higher the 'current'." It would rather be "And the more water travels, the higher the 'current'." Current would be equivalent to water throughput. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 10:20 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 25, 2019 at 16:57 | |||||
| Apr 23, 2019 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1120613437657186304 | ||
| Apr 23, 2019 at 8:59 | answer | added | Máté Juhász | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 5:24 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Apr 23, 2019 at 5:15 | answer | added | The Photon | timeline score: 12 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 4:10 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Apr 23, 2019 at 1:56 | answer | added | Hisham | timeline score: 54 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 1:35 | answer | added | GregoryNeal | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 1:26 | answer | added | G. Smith | timeline score: 19 | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 1:10 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 23, 2019 at 4:16 | |||||
| Apr 23, 2019 at 1:06 | history | asked | Addison | CC BY-SA 4.0 |