[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow

Subject: Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow
From: luis velazquez <>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 20:46:59 -0500
List-post: <">>
looking for a plate current meter for a Heath kit HL-2200 have had no luck
any info will be well appreciated , KD4YRA

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Ron Youvan <> wrote:

>  Jim W8ZR Garland wrote in part:
> Concur with Bill W6WRT re "positive vs negative" convention in describing
>> current.  The
>>> convention we use now is left over from at least a hundred years ago when
>> a scientist
>>> guessed wrong about the polarity of the electron.  To me, thinking in
>> terms of the direction
>>> of electron movement is far more clear.
>>> -Gene WB8WKU
> Sorry to disagree with you and Bill, Gene, but the standard convention for
>> electric current makes a lot of sense, and it's not just that somebody
>> guessed wrong a century ago about the polarity of electrons. The important
>> concept is that electric current is a statistical concept. Electric
>> current
>> is sometimes carried by positive charges, sometimes by negative charges,
>> but
>> the sign of the charge carrier is an entirely separate issue from the
>> direction of current flow.  In a vacuum tube, plate current flows into the
>> plate and out of the cathode, even though the motion of the electrons in
>> the
>> tube envelope is in the reverse direction.  Similarly, current flows into
>> the collector of an NPN transistor and out the emitter (hence the words
>> collector and emitter), even though transistor current may be carried by
>> holes.  Similarly, current flows out the positive terminal of a battery
>> and
>> returns into the negative terminal, no matter whether the charge of the
>> ions
>> in the battery are positively or negative. It would be a nightmare to keep
>> track of current flow, if the direction of flow depended on the sign of
>> the
>> underlying charge carriers.  You might have situations where current flows
>> out of a B+ supply to the plate of a tube, and then is annihilated by
>> current flowing in the opposite direction from within the tube, coming
>> from
>> the cathode.
>   Bull!  Conventional current flow was a wrong guess.
>   I'm sorry I must say ...
>   Please explain to us how the CURRENT flows up the ultor lead to the
> side of the bell of the cathode ray tube, runs in and around the
> aquadag inside the bell and at the right place jumps off and strikes
> that precise spot on the screen (that is based on the magnet field that
> the current is yet to pass though) then is shoots through that varying
> magnet field (when it is at the exactly correct magnitude) at high
> velocity at a tiny hole in the end of the electron gun, (which under no
> circumstance fails to go through) and lands ONLY on the only hot thing
> at the bottom of the gun.
> Yea sure!
>   The flow of holes through conducting materials is the RESULT of the
> motion of ELECTRONS.  To say other wise makes me say BULL.
>   Only some (older) larger universities and a few manufacturing
> companies (GE and a few others) hang on to the obsolete conventional
> current flow that should be forgotten by everyone.  Why?  Because
> electrons are what IS MOVING.  The flow of electron is electricity. (and
> lighting)
> --
>   Ron  KA4INM - Youvan's corollary:
>                 Every action results in unwanted side effects.
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
Amps mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>