Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

AC flowing through a cap. What actually happens?

Status
Not open for further replies.
FTL in Space. Corroborates with static electric fields; in the capacitor.

For a motionless object that "radiates" (or more correctly, is the source of) a static electric field (such as an electric charge) or a static gravitational field (such as a mass), the lines of the static field itself do not propagate through space, but only exist in space. At a distance from the source of the static field, this may cause an effect which may make the behavior of the field appear to change with speeds faster than light, if it is suddenly viewed from a different reference frame.

Thus, when an observer of a static charge (and its extended field) begins to move relative to the field-source, then the motion of the source (and its static field at all positions in space), may all appear to change instantly. This includes the direction of the field as seen far away from the field source, and which now suddenly appears to be pointing to the moving source and directed toward it as it moves, needing no time to catch up with the distant object's sudden "new" motion. In consequence, for a distant object moving transversely at a constant velocity which does not change, the direction along the static field back to its source is always and instantaneously correctly oriented to its actual position, no matter how far away the field-source is. Since there is no "retardation" of the apparent position of the source of a static field, this effect seems to be "transmitted" faster than the speed of light, although in actuality, any constant velocity motion of the "source" can always all be attributed to the observer, so all information about the motion of the "static field" that seems to be transmitted faster-than-light, is actually contained in the point of view of the observer (i.e., it can all be changed back just as quickly, if the observer stops, so that the moving "field source" is again seen as motionless).

kv
 
FTL in Space. Corroborates with static electric fields; in the capacitor.


kv

The electric field is only 'static' when current stops flowing. Until then, the field is not static, and is constantly changing, so the static condition can't possible describe what's going on. The dynamic condition isn't due to the plates within the capacitor moving, it's due to the charge moving within the plates. The charge is responsible for the fields, not the material in the capacitor. Thus the fact that the plates do not move is irrelevant, and static conditions don't apply.
 
Last edited:
ericgibbs,

RatchYou are missing the point of my missive,:)
The point I was 'trying' to make is that you and your supporting link, have to to resort to the 'incorrect', out of date, conventions of displaying and describing the flow of electronics thru a circuit, in order to try to explain your way of seeing current as 'existing' and not flowing.

Introduction to Capacitance I am baffled in regards to the point you are trying to make. I don't see anything out of date or wrong with the diagram in the link showing one electron arriving on one plate and another leaving on the opposite plate due to electrostatic induction. I don't see where I aver that current is existing and yet the charges are not moving.

As I recall, when I close a switch that connects a battery to a capacitor, [in a loop circuit], the leading edge of the voltage/current pulse applied to the capacitor will pass thru the capacitor and appear on the other side of the capacitor as a differentiated pulse.

It takes a change of voltage to make a current appear in a series capacitor circuit. But the current will not pass through the capacitor. The current will stop when equilibrium is reached between the applied voltage and the voltage across the capacitor caused by the charge imbalance.

Ratch
 
Thus the fact that the plates do not move is irrelevant, and static conditions don't apply.

I got this one. I'm no longer seeing something of that understanding plates vibrating or such.

The electric field is only 'static' when current stops flowing. Until then, the field is not static, and is constantly changing,

Yes but, only in the amount of charge not motion. If I were to draw a field this way |||||| it would be stationary or if you want it > > > > > > > vectored. But, based on this description
wiki said:
the lines of the static field itself do not propagate through space, but only exist in space. At a distance from the source of the static field,
I would say that it is < < < < < < > > > > > > beginning at the source, filling the space between almost instantaneously. The position of the field remains "statically flexed" but, the charge amplitude is rising and falling. However, the charge on the plates are moving rapidly, maybe sort of like bees to what ever arrangement it wants on plate A or plate B a charge build on Plate B is emulating plate A except Plate B will carry that accumulating charge as current to the load. This happens almost instantaneously. Simulating a virtual conductor. Even though we have the empty space which is no longer relevant.


How am I doing so far? Right or Wrong.

Finally, the only thing moving is plate A charge accumulation and Plate B charge accumulation, with one exception Plate B's conductor is connected to a load and is moving electrons as current flow.

The field it's self will remain in a "statically flexing mode" as an energized amplitude rise and fall, the event of energy rising and falling these virtual place holders are pulsating allowing energy occupying the space to create excitation.

In the end Plate B's excitation is re-arranging relative to plate A and is then drained as current in the load as long as power is connected. Once removed the field will slowly diminish to Zero.

So, the lines of the static field or place holders do not propagate through space, But, exist in the space between. At distance to from the source.

Edit: Am I making sense?
 
Last edited:
A few points to keep in mind. The article you reference is talking about objects is space, each having it's own frame of reference. It postulates that those objects cannot distinguish which object, observer or source, is actually moving, so there can be no difference in an observed static source from a moving observer, and a stationary observer and movinging static source. However, earth-bound objects have a single frame of reference ( earth ) and as such, can distinguish between a moving source and moving observer. So, the idea that the field of a moving static object simply 'extists' doesn't apply.

Back to the capacitor. Remember the pool into which we dropped the pebble? A surface wave propagated from the drop site out to the edges of the pool. Now, when we 'drop' a quantity of charge into a capacitor plate, something similar happens. An electro magnetic pulse propagates across the plates until the E field terminates on the other end. Note that this has to be the case, otherwise if we said that the entire resultant field existed all at once, then the field would have travelled faster than light, which is impossible. That would be the old "action at a distance" theory, which has long since been disproved.
 
Last edited:
Back to the capacitor. Remember the pool into which we dropped the pebble?

I guess, I read it wrong. But, I was think relativity. If we are to suggest that when point A observes point B and if point B observes point A at that single moment the distance between is not relevant because both see the other moving at the same time. So, you might show it like this A l>>>>>>>o<<<<<<<<l B

I do remember the pool but, If I had a pool with 2 plates opposite each other and drop the pebble in the middle exactly and I could continue to drop more so that the waves would be sympathetic to one another I could have wave height.

I shouldn't read so much.

The seeming propagation does appear to move but, instead each appears as increase in amplitude. They appear and just increase their intensity

Furthermore, if we have just dropped the pebble in the middle we would assume that it is traveling faster than the speed of light when in reality it only needed to travel half way from the center in either direction.

At least that's how I'm viewing it. I know it is not really conventional to think this way and is absurd.

Edit: Please humor me. I believe that we just simply create fundamental devices that actually exist somewhere; we just find out later that it was already a bigger part of the hole system, including space.

Edit:Edit: It's just my strange way of thinking again I guess. Of course I have came a long way in my thinking. Now it is a static charge moving on a plate. This is big for me. I liked Ratchet's contribution because I always believe it was something like that, until I found out about the vacuum capacitor which threw me.
 
Last edited:
The seeming propagation does appear to move but, instead each appears as increase in amplitude. They appear and just increase their intensity

It is not possible that it would appear in all space all at once. You can't violate the speed of light.

Edit: Please humor me. I believe that we just simply create fundamental devices that actually exist somewhere; we just find out later that it was already a bigger part of the hole system, including space.

Consider yourself humored.

Edit:Edit: Now it is a static charge moving on a plate.

It can be static or moving, not both.
 
Presents of Gravity at all times.

How does the presents of Gravity play a roll in Electromagnetism. It is present at all times and could therefore act as my place holder. In space on earth at all times.

Scientific American said:
"The electromagnetic interaction is carried by photons. (This is the interaction responsible for all electrical and magnetic phenomena.)

"The weak (nuclear) interaction is carried by weak bosons. (This is the interaction that governs certain radioactive decays, such as beta decay.)

"The gravitational interaction is carried by gravitons. (This, of course, is the interaction that gives rise to the familiar pull of gravity.)

"Although the graviton has yet to be observed, some of its hypothesized properties are known. It is a massless particle having no electrical charge. Its spin (a property of subatomic particles that is not directly analogous to the rotation of a macroscopic object like a top) is twice that of the other field particles listed above; in technical terms, its spin is 2 hbar instead of 1 hbar, where hbar is Planck's constant divided by 2 pi.

"Two masses attract each other gravitationally because they are constantly exchanging virtual gravitons, just as two electrically charged particles are drawn together--or repelled apart--by the exchange of virtual photons. (A 'virtual particle' is one that cannot be directly detected.) This exchange happens at all times. Gravitational waves, in contrast, can arise when an object undergoes an acceleration. Asymmetric supernova explosions or collisions between neutron stars are the kinds of events that could produce powerful blasts of gravitational waves. Gravitational waves have been indirectly detected in certain binary neutron star systems, in which the energy carried off by those waves causes observable changes in the stars' orbits.

"Virtual gravitons pass between two objects even when there are no gravitational waves present (for instance, when the masses are at rest), so it really isn't correct to say that gravity is a wave.

"An analogy with an electrically charged particle might help clarify the situation. When a charged particle is at rest, it is surrounded by a static electric field (no waves). If another charged particle encounters this field, it experiences a force. The quantum view would describe this in terms of an exchange of virtual photons by the two particles. On the other hand, if a charged particle is accelerated, its electric field is ' shaken' to produce an electromagnetic (light) wave that spreads out from the particle. In this case, the energy and momentum of the light wave are carried by real, detectable photons.

"In a similar manner, when a massive particle is at rest, it is surrounded by a static gravitational field (a static curvature of spacetime, no waves) . If another massive particle encounters this field, it experiences a force that can be described in quantum terms as an exchange of virtual gravitons by the two masses. On the other hand, if a massive particle is accelerated, its gravitational field is 'shaken' to produce a gravitational wave that spreads out through spacetime from the particle. The energy and momentum of that gravitational wave are carried by real gravitons."

So, if a place holder could be an operational component. Then let's move it, or pull it. If I were to stretch a virtual gravitational spring between A and B then pull it from A instantly B would fell it's tension that operational tension increases in amplitudes as both side react to the flex variation periods. No, need to travel at the speed of light.

This means that energy does not have to pass between the plates at all it's only amplifying . In some ways to act as a conductor doing the exact same thing as in a conductor one in one out. Then the time variation of charge is simply charge amplitude from Zero at "rest" to "peak".
 
Last edited:
How does the presents of Gravity play a roll in Electromagnetism.

It doesn't.

It is present at all times and could therefore act as my place holder.

E-M fields don't need a placeholder.

So, if a place holder could be an operational component. Then let's move it, or pull it. If I were to stretch a virtual gravitational spring between A and B then pull it from A instantly B would fell it's tension that operational tension increases in amplitudes as both side react to the flex variation periods. No, need to travel at the speed of light.

Not true. B would not feel the tension instantly, but some time after A was pulled.

This means that energy does not have to pass between the plates at all it's only amplifying .

Energy must pass between the plates. Static conditions don't hold while current is flowing.

In some ways to act as a conductor doing the exact same thing as in a conductor one in one out. Then the time variation of charge is simply charge amplitude from Zero at "rest" to "peak".

It's not quite that simple, but whatever works for you.
 
Last edited:
Quote Originally Posted by killivolt
How does the presents of Gravity play a roll in Electromagnetism.

Brownout, It doesn't.
Ok but, weak attraction gravitationally pull does exist between 2 objects. Yet, is overcome by the earths field but, is present in any case.

Quote Originally Posted by killivolt
It is present at all times and could therefore act as my place holder.

Brownout, E-M fields don't need a placeholder.

Gravity has a roll and is a bigger part of the smaller system. Of which and in part not fully known?

Read but, stop read at stop:
Scientific American said:
"Two masses attract each other gravitationally because they are constantly exchanging virtual gravitons, just as two electrically charged particles are drawn together--or repelled apart--by the exchange of virtual photons. (A 'virtual particle' is one that cannot be directly detected.) This exchange happens at all times.
Stop:

Start Read:
Quote Originally Posted by killivolt
So, if a place holder could be an operational component. Then let's move it, or pull it. If I were to stretch a virtual gravitational spring between A and B then pull it from A instantly B would fell it's tension that operational tension increases in amplitudes as both side react to the flex variation periods. No, need to travel at the speed of light.


Brownout, Not true. B would not feel the tension instantly, but some time after A was pulled.

Agreed. But, divide the sum which would be the variance of force.

Quote Originally Posted by killivolt,
SoThis means that energy does not have to pass between the plates at all it's only amplifying .

Brownout, Energy must pass between the plates. Static conditions don't hold while current is flowing.

Energy must pass between the plates "Yes" However, Regardless of current. Static is the process that started the hole thing in the first place why would it stop?

Quote Originally Posted by killivolt,
In some ways to act as a conductor doing the exact same thing as in a conductor one in one out. Then the time variation of charge is simply charge amplitude from Zero at "rest" to "peak".

Brownout, It's not quite that simple, but whatever works for you.

It's already working. Not me hahaha :D

Seriously, the conductor is a principle I want to apply because it's fundamentally sound. On the other hand that damn vacuum has my nerve.
 
Last edited:
Ok but, weak attraction gravitationally pull does exist between 2 objects. Yet, is overcome by the earths field but, is present in any case.

Presense is not sufficient to be a factor.



Gravity has a roll and is a bigger part of the smaller system. Of which and in part not fully known?

Gravity is very well understood. Gravity doesn't affect the propagation of fields, other than to alter their course in a relativistic sense.

Agreed. But, divide the sum which would be the variance of force.

Not sure what that is important, but what is "variance of force?" The force on one end is felt on the other end at a later time,determined by the properties of the medium. Gravity is thought to propagate at the speed of light.


Energy must pass between the plates "Yes" However, Regardless of current. Static is the process that started the hole thing in the first place why would it stop?

Because the conditions change. A system that starts off in a static condition doesn't have to stay that way forever. When you connect a source to a capacitor, charge flows into the plates. This is not a static condition.


Seriously, the conductor is a principle I want to apply because it's fundamentally sound. On the other hand that damn vacuum has my nerve.

Have you taken Electro-Magnitism? Have you studied transmission lines? If you're a student, you might want to add this to your curriculum. It's alot of fun, but alot of work too.

PS: This sutff is typically covered in detail in advanced, 400 level classes. If you're a freshman, you'll have to wait a couple years :)
 
Last edited:
So, I had some fun with my granddaughter. We took my "Fluke VoltAlert 1lac".


**broken link removed**



Well I seemed to make it work with everything we tested. She could not light it with the Diode on my mouse or my wifi. Interesting huh. We are both the same resistance.

As I pushed it in toward the source it was brighter so the field strength was stronger and shorter between fields closer to the source which we would expect.

My resistance and her resistances about the same while my mass is greater. While holding the voltAlert I was increasing the sensitivity; while she could not do it with all frequency's I'm guessing.

Suddenly my son was interested in this I could tell he could was making it even more sensitive. I measured him at about 435k his girlfriend at about 167k I was about 836k my granddaughter about the same. I could only measure wife set on meg after she had eaten it was about 510k. Each of us actually changed in resistance after eating. We all went down.

My son put it on top of my computer with the tip up and held his hand closer and closer until it lit up in a dipole type reaction. If I lay it on it's side no reaction but stand straight up hold your hand about 3 inches away and it would light it. Even though the tip was not toward the source.

Each of us would make it respond differently except for my Granddaughter we are the same approximate size. I'm thinking maybe different levels of minerals or something. Maybe Iron.

We all had some fun with it, they got their first experience with invisible EM fields. This has nothing to with what I'm saying. I just don't get propagation through a Vacuum. I don't have any trouble with propagation through a Medium.

"So, fields in my mind in a Vacuum are not propagated they expand each field pushing on the other, much like hanging electromagnets on strings next to each other all the poles are opposing each other and you power them they don't propagate away from each other they expand pushing against one another.

If the magnet were Plate A it would be the source and stationary standing force They will be shorter and stronger toward the source and farther apart and weaker away from it.

Not only "that" they will also be pulled across the void; filling the empty space attracted to Plate B mass and resistance. Each are layers of an expanding field not propagating field that will intensify with increase of current flow at Plate A.

Notwithstanding the field generated by Plate B will increases and decreases producing it's own EM according to field strength which should intensify the reaction. "
 
Last edited:
Fields do propagate in a vacuum. Magnets are a static source of the fields, but a circuit is dynamic, and thus produces dynamic, probagating fields. How do you think EMI is produced in circuits??? It's is a propagating wave caused by dynamic conditions in circuits, and it works in a vacuum, as well as in an atmosphere.
 
Fields do propagate in a vacuum. Magnets are a static source of the fields, but a circuit is dynamic, and thus produces dynamic, probagating fields. How do you think EMI is produced in circuits??? It's is a propagating wave caused by dynamic conditions in circuits, and it works in a vacuum, as well as in an atmosphere.

So, is their Back EMF Plate B is producing when it starts flow. If so, why wouldn't it cancel Plate A Propagation?

Edit: If that were true a Transformer would be canceled also.

Never mind. I'm sick today.
 
Last edited:
The Source Charge Problem.

Bogus information removed.

Edit: I just goggled the Author he has Patented a motionless Generator. I should have known.

**broken link removed**

None of his links work. T.E. Bearden free energy expert

What Ever. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Fields do propagate in a vacuum. Magnets are a static source of the fields, but a circuit is dynamic, and thus produces dynamic, probagating fields. How do you think EMI is produced in circuits??? It's is a propagating wave caused by dynamic conditions in circuits, and it works in a vacuum, as well as in an atmosphere.


Oh, and was not trying to connect the representation of the magnets to imply they are the same thing. I just was using stacked near each other and only when energized they separate to give an image of layer of fields expanding not propagating. I'm nearing the end of Philosophical view on Vacuum and EM waves Propagation vs Expansion.

Edit: So, EM fields don't do this.

https://askthephysicist.com/images/anim04.gif
 
Last edited:
The fields would propagate at the speed of light, so you would not "see" any image of the field propagating. It would appear to happen instantly. Remember, nothing ever happens in zero time.
 
Last edited:
The fields would propagate at the speed of light, so you would not "see" any image of the field propagating. It would appear to happen instantly. Remember, nothing ever happens in zero time.

How do you like the moving gif pretty neat wouldn't you say hahaha:D

Edit: I like the right angle fluctuation periods. For a novice it really helps to picture it.
 
Last edited:
Hello,


You guys still talking about this? ha ha. All you have to do in difficult problems is track the energy and figure out where it all goes. There can then be no mistake unless you screw up the math. But before we do that, let me digress slightly...

I was showing a setup with two water tanks where the only water flow was in the pipe connecting the two, then Mr RB brought up the possibility of air flowing through between the tops of the tanks. I then inserted an infinite plane of plexiglass between the two tanks to isolate them. But before i even did that, here's the interesting fact:
In the capacitor circuit we have dq/dt in the wire, which is in units of Amps. The so called 'displacement current' is also in Amps. Now since the flow between water tanks in the pipe is in units of say cubic meters of water per second, that would mean the units of air would have to also be in units of cubic meters of water per second. Doesnt make sense does it? So there's no displacement current or else it is a different *kind* of thing altogether.
Then Brownout said that there is no displacement current between tanks "because there is no interaction between tanks". Well, not true. I said there was no displacement current, that's true, but i never said there was no 'interaction' There's a big difference. The changing water tanks would have a changing gravity field. Now are we to say that a changing gravity field generates a flow of *water* *through* the plexiglass plate panel? I seriously doubt this. Not only that, this 'flow' if it were to exist, would have to be in units of cubic meters of water per second. Not only THAT, but the numerical value of this flow would have to EQUAL the water flow in the pipe! Try getting that to happen.
But the real point to all this is that if we postulate the existence of a field normal to the gravitational field and calculate it's value, then we COULD numerically equate this to a fictitious flow of water and call it the "displacement water current". It doesnt really flow, but the units would be the same and so would the numerical value.

With that thar being said, lets turn back to the actual circuit and try to track the total energy and see what happens.

The circuit is a constant voltage source V1 in series with a resistor in series with a capacitor. We want to calculate the total energy delivered by the source as the cap charges up, and equate that to the energy in the resistor and capacitor. The resistor dissipates energy and the cap stores it, so if no energy flows between the plates of the capacitor we would expect our results would come out to be such that the total energy leaving the source can be fully accounted for. The initial energy in the cap at t=0 is zero.



Voltage across capacitor:
vC(t)=V1*(1-e^(-t/(C*R)))

Current into and out of capacitor:
iC(t)=C*dv/dt=(e^(-t/(C*R))*V1)/R

Instantaneous energy stored in capacitor:
eC(t)=vC(t)*iC(t)=((1-e^(-t/(C*R)))*e^(-t/(C*R))*V1^2)/R

Total energy stored in capacitor:
eCT=Intg[0 to +inf] eC(t) dt=(C*V1^2)/2

Current through resistor:
iR(t)=iC(t)=(e^(-t/(C*R))*V1)/R

Instantaneous power absorbed by resistor:
pR(t)=iR(t)^2*R=(e^(-(2*t)/(C*R))*V1^2)/R

Total energy absorbed by resistor:
pRT=Intg[0 to +inf] pR(t) dt=(C*V1^2)/2

Voltage across source:
v(t)=V1

Current through source:
i(t)=iC(t)=(e^(-t/(C*R))*V1)/R

Instantaneous energy delivered by source:
e(t)=v(t)*i(t)=(e^(-t/(C*R))*V1^2)/R

Total energy delivered by source:
eT=Intg[0 to +inf] e(t) dt=C*V1^2

Comparing total energy of source to total energy of resistor and total energy stored in capacitor:
eT=pRT+eCT

We end up with:
C*V1^2=C*V1^2/2+C*V1^2/2

Simplified:
V1^2=V1^2/2+V1^2/2

or:
V1^2=V1^2

So the energy delivered by the source equals the sum of the energy absorbed by the resistor
plus the energy stored in the capacitor, thus all of the energy is accounted for and there
is no excess energy to be found.


Numerical Example:

C=1F, V1=1v, R=1 ohm

First the units:
C*V1^2=C*V1^2/2+C*V1^2/2
F*V^2=F*V^2+F*V^2
this leads to:
F*V^2=F*V^2

so we're good there. Now the quantities:

C*V1^2=C*V1^2/2+C*V1^2/2
1*1^2=1*1^2/2+1*1^2/2
1*1 =1*1/2 + 1*1/2
1=0.5+0.5
1=1


So we've again accounted for all of the energy, and half was dissipated by the resistor and
the other half was stored in the capacitor.

If we connect a resistor across the capacitor, we'll find some more of the energy leaving as heat, but that would mean less energy stored in the capacitor too. Thus, the leakage current can also be accounted for if we postulate the existence of that too, but to equate that energy to any energy that would move between plates we'd have to use a resistor of zero ohms, which clearly would not allow ANY energy storage in the capacitor.

The only conclusions could be that either the 'stuff' that is in between the plates is only virtual particles, or that any possible real particles move back and forth between the plates. In any case, we can not truthfully state that anything flows "through" the cap.
Any argument contrary to this would have to show not only where the extra energy comes from, but also where it goes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

New Articles From Microcontroller Tips

Back
Top