Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+electron\s+flow\s+vs\.\s+current\s+flow\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+electron\s+flow\s+vs\.\s+current\s+flow\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

21. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: dufferjames@hotmail.com (James Duffer); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:50:15 CDT; Your friend is correct if he is referring to conventional current. All of the older texts used this convention. However, if we are talking about electron flow direction then the direction is from neg; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00273.html (10,361 bytes)
22. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: dufferjames@hotmail.com (James Duffer); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:54:50 CDT; Just think how current flows within the source, a battery for example. Now didn't that clear it up for you. 73, Jim, WD4AIR To: <tentec@contesting.com> _______________________________________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00274.html (13,752 bytes)
23. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: reid.w.simmons@intel.com (Simmons, Reid W); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:17:28 -0700; Actually, I found mathematics (up through differential equations anyway) to be quite understandable and straight forward. It is a very precise science [language] with exacting rules that will explain; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00280.html (15,336 bytes)
24. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: reid.w.simmons@intel.com (Simmons, Reid W); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:34:18 -0700; ...And then there is the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle to consider when trying to measure the velocity or position of an electron. :-) Reid, K7YX Sort of like if you imagine a canal, and there's a; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00281.html (9,665 bytes)
25. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: reid.w.simmons@intel.com (Simmons, Reid W); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:43:47 -0700; Yup, and then there is that little guy sitting on the electron who swears that he isn't moving at all and that it's the "electron deficient" atom that is moving. Whereas the little guy sitting on the; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00283.html (11,049 bytes)
26. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: Mark.E.Clark@Pfizer.com (Clark, Mark E [Palarco]); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:44:52 -0400; Well that puts us into an interesting situation whereas we can place an electron into the context of a moving particle(with mass) AND (but not at the same time) consider it to be energy flow(no mass; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00284.html (10,526 bytes)
27. [TenTec] electron flow vs. current flow (score: 1): Author: seweber@netnitco.net (seweber@netnitco.net); Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:30:51 -0500; Dang, I thought smoke made this stuff work. I've cut wires but haven't seen any electrons flow out. I've looked at the cut end under a magnifier but haven't seen any holes, however when one of those; /archives//html/TenTec/2000-10/msg00298.html (9,904 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 27
Page: [1] [2]