Timeline for Who (and Why) started the "electrons are negative, protons are positive" convention?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 14, 2018 at 14:36 | comment | added | endolith | @intuited The word "electron" was coined 245 years after the word "electricity". Electricity was originally a property of a material (like "elasticity"), specifically, "the ability for a material to take an electric charge, like a piece of amber (electrum in Greek)". So for a long time "electrick" was a noun, meaning "an insulator", while "a non-electrick" was a conductor. | |
| Feb 7, 2015 at 7:01 | comment | added | Luboš Motl | Your "correction" of the "positively charged carriers" is wrong. This correct triplet of word may also be said as "positive-charge carriers" but not "positive charge-carriers" because carriers in general cannot be positive or negative. It is the charge that is positive or negative, and that's why the adjective or adverb "positive" or "positively" is linked to the word "charge". ... It is also completely untrue that holes can't travel by themselves. Holes may travel perfectly - they behave exactly as positive-charge particles. | |
| Feb 7, 2015 at 6:59 | comment | added | Luboš Motl | Sorry, @Glance, but I must assure you that the velocity has a sign and may be positive or negative. In 3 dimensions, velocity is a vector which can have any direction. In 1 dimension of a wire, it is a 1-dimensional vector which is equivalent to a real number including the sign that may be either plus or minus, and it's always possible to say whether the velocity and the current have the same or opposite sign. | |
| Feb 6, 2015 at 11:08 | comment | added | glS | continues: charge separation takes place, and the absence of that electron leaves a net positive charge in the valance band. This hole in the valance band and the electron now in the conduction band remain separated (unless recombination occurs), and they essentially travel alongside one another as a charge-carrier. | |
| Feb 6, 2015 at 11:07 | comment | added | glS | continues: Secondly, "positively charged carriers" is a confusing term, where the correct term is "positive charge-carriers". And in the case of semiconductors, "holes" are not capable of traveling by themselves; it is an electron-hole pair that is a referred to as the charge carrier in this case, i.e. when an electron is excited from the valence band into the conduction band, | |
| Feb 6, 2015 at 11:06 | comment | added | glS | An anonymous user tried to edit the post to add a comment. I'll post the comment here: In the second to last and last paragraph, where "electron velocity" is mentioned, the author's may mean to say "the arrows for the current are drawn in the opposite direction than the movement of the electrons", though neither that sentence nor the one he uses make sense, because there is only one "sign" for velocity, as there is no such thing as a "negative velocity". I believe the author should correctly establish what he means to say, edit his entry, then delete this first paragraph. | |
| Feb 6, 2015 at 10:59 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 6, 2015 at 11:36 | |||||
| Aug 27, 2013 at 21:44 | comment | added | intuited | Since it's called "electricity", it seems more sensible for "electrons" to be defined to have a positive charge. I guess alternatively we could start calling it "protonity"... but isn't it the flow of electrons from nucleus to nucleus that creates the electric current? | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 18:11 | comment | added | Wouter | Great answer! I think symbols help on the argument that the other sign convention would not be "better": the (local) current can be written as $\vec{I} = nq\vec{v}A$, where $n$ is the (local) carrier density, $q$ the carrier charge, $\vec{v}$ the (instantaneous, net) carrier velocity and $A$ the surface perpendicular to $\vec{v}$. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 17:31 | vote | accept | Pacerier | ||
| Jun 18, 2013 at 16:57 | history | edited | Luboš Motl | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 334 characters in body
|
| Jun 18, 2013 at 16:52 | history | answered | Luboš Motl | CC BY-SA 3.0 |